【作者】 王慧文；

【导师】 黎四奇； 张才金；

【作者基本信息】 湖南大学 ， 法律硕士（法学）（专业学位）， 2022， 硕士

【摘要】 我国信息型市场操纵行为随着证券市场的发展,数量呈上升趋势。阙文彬、谢家荣操纵证券市场案等三个案件,是信息型市场操纵证券纠纷中关于信息型市场操纵“利用信息优势操纵”、市值管理的认定与违法所得额认定规则适用的典型案例。其中的争议焦点主要为:信息型市场操纵中“利用信息优势操纵”的认定;如何界定信息型市场操纵与市值管理两者的概念;市场操纵中违法所得计算标准认定问题。就信息型市场操纵“利用信息优势操控”,从构成要件、与虚假陈述和内幕交易等概念的区分入手进行行为认定,提出“利用信息优势操纵”不同于“利用信息优势连续买卖操纵”,应当将前者作为界定信息型操纵的独立行为,在现行法律没有明确规定适用条文的情况下,适用兜底条款予以规制。就判断信息型市场操纵与市值管理的认定分歧问题,两者区分上存在难点,实务认定中需要揭开伪市值管理行为的面纱,对于市值管理的认定不能僵硬的对每一个行为进行独立认定,而是应当综合现有行为、客观效果及主观故意,具体来说就是对价值转移、股价异动和主观意图进行综合分析,从而区分行为属于信息型市场操纵还是市值管理。就违法所得额的认定和计算标准问题,司法解释目前仅对违法所得额的概念予以界定,而对于如何具体计算,针对实务中和学界存在的不同观点进行评析,并对于违法所得额的计算节点和计算范围等问题给出了具体的解构路径。同时在针对三个争议焦点进行学理、法理和实务观点的探讨后,分别针对三个案例进行针对性的评析,基于存在的法律问题,在延伸思考部分对于“利用信息优势操纵”和“利用信息优势连续买卖操纵”提出区分模式建议;对于信息型市场操纵与市值管理认定分歧提出出台市值管理指引、完善上市公司信息披露制度和建立“伪市值管理”案例库等建议;针对目前违法所得额计算标准立法缺失的问题,建议将允许行为人进行反证纳入司法解释中。更多还原

【Abstract】 With the development of the securities market,the number of my country’s information-based market manipulation is on the rise.The three cases of Que Wenbin and Xie Jiarong’s manipulation of the securities market are typical cases of information-based market manipulation,continuous trading manipulation using information advantages,determination of market value management,and application of rules for determination of illegal gains are securities disputes over information-based market manipulation.The focus of the dispute is mainly: the identification of manipulation with information advantage in information-based market manipulation;how to distinguish the identification and analysis of information-based market manipulation with market value management;illegal income calculation standard determination problem.Regarding information-based market manipulation,manipulating by using information advantages,starting from the elements,and distinguishing from concepts such as false statement and insider trading,it is proposed that manipulating by using information advantages is different from using information advantages to continuously trade and manipulate and using information advantages to manipulate.The former should be regarded as an independent act that defines information manipulation,in the case that the current law does not clearly stipulate the applicable provisions,it shall be regulated by the application of the bottom line.Regarding the differences in the determination of information-based market manipulation and market value management,the determination of market value management cannot rigidly determine each behavior independently,but should integrate existing behaviors,objective effects and subjective intentions.Comprehensive analysis of transfers,stock price movements,and subjective intentions to distinguish whether behavior is information-based market manipulation or market value management.Regarding the identification and calculation standards of illegal income,the judicial interpretation currently only defines the concept of illegal income,and there are different views on how to calculate the amount of illegal income in practice and in academia.Problems such as computing nodes and computing scopes give specific deconstruction paths.At the same time,after analyzing the academic,jurisprudence and practical viewpoints on the three disputed points,it conducts a targeted evaluation and analysis on the three cases.Based on the existing legal problems,in the extended thinking section,this paper puts forward suggestions on distinguishing models for manipulation by using information advantages and continuous trading and manipulation by using information advantages.For information-based market manipulation and market value management,it proposes to establish a case database of pseudo market value management.In view of the lack of legislation on the current calculation standards for illegal income,it is suggested that the perpetrators’ rebuttal evidence should be included in the judicial interpretation.更多还原