RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    자본시장법상 불공정거래행위에 대한 과징금제도의 도입 = Introduction of Financial Penalty against Unfair Transaction under Capital Market and Financial Investment Services Act

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A101613164

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    In the capital markets, there is a high level of asymmetry of informationdue to none-face-to-face transactions among an unspecified number ofparties. Regardless of continuous efforts by financial supervisory authority toremove unfair transactions in the capital markets, unfair trade practices arestill prevalent. In addition, the types of violations are becoming morecomplex and cunning, as well as increasing in numbers.
    In order to cope with unfair transactions, the Capital Markets andFinancial Investment Services Act(hereinafter called as ‘the Act’) has sanctionsagainst violations as well as disclosure regulations. Recently, there is acontroversy because the Act imposes financial penalty in violating disclosureregulations, but not in unfair transactions.
    For the effective regulations in the capital markets, there are numeroussteps that we must go through. First of all, we need to block all possibilityof violations beforehand needed. Second, strict sanctions are needed. Fromthe perspectives of the crime economy, if committing a crime or an illegaltransaction has more benefits than its penalties, there would be a lot moreunfair transactions. However, if the penalties of illegal transactions weremuch more severe than their profits, unfair trade practices can be smallerbecause the economic incentives are too low.
    Financial penalty systems against unfair transactions exist in the US, UK,and Japan. Thus, Korea should introduce financial penalty in order to dealwith several types of unfair transactions effectively. Finally, introducing theconcept of ‘market abuse’ under the proposal by FSC and Department ofJustice, dated on April 18, 2013, may cause confusion with the meaning of‘unfair trading’ under Article 178 of the Act. Therefore, the proposal must berevised.
    번역하기

    In the capital markets, there is a high level of asymmetry of informationdue to none-face-to-face transactions among an unspecified number ofparties. Regardless of continuous efforts by financial supervisory authority toremove unfair transactions in t...

    In the capital markets, there is a high level of asymmetry of informationdue to none-face-to-face transactions among an unspecified number ofparties. Regardless of continuous efforts by financial supervisory authority toremove unfair transactions in the capital markets, unfair trade practices arestill prevalent. In addition, the types of violations are becoming morecomplex and cunning, as well as increasing in numbers.
    In order to cope with unfair transactions, the Capital Markets andFinancial Investment Services Act(hereinafter called as ‘the Act’) has sanctionsagainst violations as well as disclosure regulations. Recently, there is acontroversy because the Act imposes financial penalty in violating disclosureregulations, but not in unfair transactions.
    For the effective regulations in the capital markets, there are numeroussteps that we must go through. First of all, we need to block all possibilityof violations beforehand needed. Second, strict sanctions are needed. Fromthe perspectives of the crime economy, if committing a crime or an illegaltransaction has more benefits than its penalties, there would be a lot moreunfair transactions. However, if the penalties of illegal transactions weremuch more severe than their profits, unfair trade practices can be smallerbecause the economic incentives are too low.
    Financial penalty systems against unfair transactions exist in the US, UK,and Japan. Thus, Korea should introduce financial penalty in order to dealwith several types of unfair transactions effectively. Finally, introducing theconcept of ‘market abuse’ under the proposal by FSC and Department ofJustice, dated on April 18, 2013, may cause confusion with the meaning of‘unfair trading’ under Article 178 of the Act. Therefore, the proposal must berevised.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 이원우, "현행 금융감독법상 과징금제도의 쟁점과 개선방안" 서울대학교 금융법센터 (15) : 2006

    2 금융위원회, "주가조작 등 불공정거래근절 종합대책 보도자료"

    3 김대근, "자본시장법상 형사제재의 한계와 개선방안에 관한 연구" 한국형사정책연구원 2011

    4 구승모, "자본시장법상 불공정거래행위 수사 현황 및 개선방안- 불공정거래행위에 대한 과징금 도입논의와 관련하여 -" 법조협회 61 (61): 54-109, 2012

    5 법무법인 율촌, "자본시장법상 불공정거래에 대한 과징금 도입방안, 금융위원회연구용역보고서" 2010

    6 양기진, "자본시장법: 사례와 이론" 박영사 2012

    7 자본시장연구원, "자본시장 불공정거래 관련 과징금 제도 도입시 구체적 운영방안, 금융감독원 연구용역보고서" 2013

    8 김일중, "규제위반에 대한 행정부의 금전적 제재 : 공정거래법상 과징금 수준의 결정요인에 관한 실증분석" 법학연구소 51 (51): 147-189, 2010

    9 瀬谷ゆり子, "金融商品取引規制のエンフォースメント―課徴金制度の役割" 桃山法学 2010

    10 金融庁, "金融商品取引法における課徴金事例集, 2008-2012"

    1 이원우, "현행 금융감독법상 과징금제도의 쟁점과 개선방안" 서울대학교 금융법센터 (15) : 2006

    2 금융위원회, "주가조작 등 불공정거래근절 종합대책 보도자료"

    3 김대근, "자본시장법상 형사제재의 한계와 개선방안에 관한 연구" 한국형사정책연구원 2011

    4 구승모, "자본시장법상 불공정거래행위 수사 현황 및 개선방안- 불공정거래행위에 대한 과징금 도입논의와 관련하여 -" 법조협회 61 (61): 54-109, 2012

    5 법무법인 율촌, "자본시장법상 불공정거래에 대한 과징금 도입방안, 금융위원회연구용역보고서" 2010

    6 양기진, "자본시장법: 사례와 이론" 박영사 2012

    7 자본시장연구원, "자본시장 불공정거래 관련 과징금 제도 도입시 구체적 운영방안, 금융감독원 연구용역보고서" 2013

    8 김일중, "규제위반에 대한 행정부의 금전적 제재 : 공정거래법상 과징금 수준의 결정요인에 관한 실증분석" 법학연구소 51 (51): 147-189, 2010

    9 瀬谷ゆり子, "金融商品取引規制のエンフォースメント―課徴金制度の役割" 桃山法学 2010

    10 金融庁, "金融商品取引法における課徴金事例集, 2008-2012"

    11 大來志郞, "課徵金制度の見直し" (1840) : 2008

    12 HM Treasury, "White Paper: A New Approach to Financial Regulation: the Blueprint for Reform" 2011

    13 Lisa J. Finnell, "United States v. Carpenter: Second Circuit Overextends the Misappropriation Theory of Criminal Liability Under Rule 10b-5" 12 (12): 1987

    14 "Statement of the Securities and Exchange Commission Concerning Financial Penalties"

    15 "FCA Regulated Fees and Levies: Rates Proposals 2013/14"

    16 Brian Harris, "Disciplinary and Regulatory Proceedings" Jordans 2013

    17 V. K. Burrows, "Administrative Law Judges: an Overview" Congressional Research Service 2013

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2026 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2020-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2017-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2008-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2007-05-07 학술지명변경 외국어명 : 미등록 -> KOREAN COMMERCIAL LAW ASSOCIATION KCI등재
    2006-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2005-10-18 학술지등록 한글명 : 상사법연구
    외국어명 : 미등록
    KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2001-07-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    1999-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 1 1 1.07
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.96 0.93 0.979 0.58
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼