<論文>インサイダー取引の基礎となる重要事実について : 日本商事株式インサイダー取引事件最高裁判決を中心に
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
Japan revised Securities and Exchange Law on May, 1988 to significantly strengthen regulation on inside trading. Tt is considered necessary to define "the person who has committed inside trading" and "the significant facts which inside trading is based on", because committing inside trading is recognized as a criminal action. Securities and Exchange Law recognizes insider, quasi-insider and acceptor of inside information as the person who has committed inside trading. Significant facts are stated in Art. 166 (2) (1)(2)(3) and (4) of Securities and Exchange Law. Art. 166 (2)(1) includes significant facts relating to decisions of the board of directors of the publicly held company. Art. 166 (2)(2) refers to significant facts relating to occurrence of certain facts. Art, 166 (2)(3) concerns about significant facts relating to changes of amount sold, ordinary profit and loss, net profit etc. of the publicly held company. Art. 166 (2)(4) states significant facts relating to management, business or property of the publicly held company and tremendously influencing on investment judgement of investors, beside what is stated in Art. 166 (2)(1)(2)(3). Currently, there is an academic arguement on how to deal with relations between Art. 166 (2)(1)(2)(3) and Art. 166 (2)(4). Some people consider that Art, 166 (2)(1)(2)(3) and (4) exist separately. Other people consider that one significant fact may hold two aspects which include Art. 166 (2)(1)(2)(3) and (4) together in some cases. The Supreme Court accepted the latter in a current judgement on inside trading concerning Nihon Shoji's stocks. However, I do not consider the decision of the Supreme Court acceptable, because it misunderstood the legislative purport on relations between Art, 166 (2)(1)(2)(3) and Art. 166 (2)(4).
- 1999-09-30
著者
関連論文
- インサイダー取引の基礎となる重要事実について : 日本商事株式インサイダー取引事件最高裁判決を中心に
- インサイダー取引の基礎となる重要事実について : 日本商事株式インサイダー取引事件最高裁判決を中心に
- 中国の内部者取引規制の現状と課題