|
| 文章编号：1672-3104(2023)06-0058-13 |
| |
|
内幕交易犯罪中内幕信息形成时点的类型化认定——基于司法实践的分析 |
| |
沈伟，陈徐安黎 |
| |
|
（上海交通大学凯原法学院，上海，200030） |
| |
| 摘 要： 内幕交易犯罪中现有内幕信息形成时点的认定规则存在着逻辑性、明确性、可预见性以及可操作性上的障碍，造成了司法实践的认定困境，有必要重构内幕信息形成时点的认定规则。通过对2012年至今共122份生效刑事裁判文书进行类型化梳理发现，司法实践已经形成了与“发生概率—影响程度”规则相契合的“自发秩序”，利好型内幕信息根据影响程度区分为并购重组类、重大投资类、法定重大利好类、其他重大利好类，内幕信息形成时点对应的发生概率依次增强，发展阶段依次推后。以“类型化”的方式对司法实践经验进行归纳，可以有效解决内幕信息形成时点现有认定模式过于抽象的司法困境。对于内幕信息形成时点的认定，可以在区分不同类别信息的基础上，通过类型化归纳的方式形成推定模型，并结合个案中的发生概率、影响程度及其他价格敏感因素，对认定结论进行修正。在作出不利于犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的修正时，法院应当提供“更强理由”的支持。在未来宜修改和细化司法解释的规定，构建以“理性投资者”和“价格敏感性”原则为指导、以“发生概率—影响程度”标准为桥梁、以类型化规则为抓手的内幕信息形成时点新型认定模式。 |
| |
| 关键词： 内幕交易罪；内幕信息形成；价格敏感性；理性投资者；类型化 |
| |
|
| |
Categorizing and identifying the time point of inside information in the crime of inside transaction in light of judicial practices |
| |
SHEN Wei, CHEN Xuanli |
| |
（Koguan School of Law, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200030, China） |
| |
| Abstract: There are obstacles in logic, clarity, predictability and operability in the existing rules for identifying the time point of formation of inside information in the crime of inside transaction, hence resulting in identification dilemma in judicial practices. Therefore, it is necessary to reconstruct the rules for identifying the time point of formation of inside information. Through the categorization of 122 criminal adjudication documents in effect since 2012, it is found that the judicial practice has formed a “spontaneous order” consistent with the rule of “probability of occurrence - degree of influence”, that favorable inside information, according to the degree of influence, can be divided into merger and reorganization type, major investment type, legal major type and other major types with occurrence probability corresponding to the formation point of inside information successively increasing, but with the development stage being successively postponed. Summarizing the judicial practice experiences in the way of “categorization” can solve the judicial dilemma that the current identification mode at the time of formation of inside information is too abstract. Determining the formation time point of inside information should be based on distinguishing different types of information, forming a presumption model through category induction, and correcting it in combination with the probability of occurrence, degree of impact, and other factors affecting price. But when making amendments that are not conducive to suspects or defendants, the court should provide support for “stronger reasons”. In the future, in stipulating the provisions of judicial interpretation that should better amended and specified, we will construct a new identification model of the time point of the formation of inside information with the principles of “reasonable investor” and “price sensitivity” as the guide, with the standard of “probability of occurrence-degree of influence” as the bridge, and with categorization rules as gripping point. |
| |
Key words: the crime of inside transaction; formation of inside information; price sensitivity; rational investor; categorization |
| |
|
|
