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
    KCI등재후보

    자본시장 불공정거래로 인한 손해배상 활성화 = Damages and Unfair Trade in Capital Market

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A99845763

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act(hereafter "the Act") provides that such the unfair trades as the abuse of non-publicized crucial information(art. 174 of the Act), the operation of market prices(art. 176 of the Act), unfair competion(art. 178 of the Act) be punished so as for the actor to be in prison up to 10 years or fined up to five hundred million(art. 443 of the Act); the Act also provides that the victims of the unfair trades have access to damages(arts. 175, 177, 179 of the Act). Such regulations in both criminal as well as civil dimensions have been continually reinforced in the process of reforming the old Securities Transaction Act(s) as well as establishing the Act; in addition, Act on Securities-Related Class Actions was introduced to come into force on January 1, 2005. However, the capital market nowadays faces, notwithstanding all the legislatorial endeavors mentioned in the above, continuously increasing number of unfair trades by the hands not only of securities specialists and but also of individual investors. With the increasing number of unfair trades, the number and amount of victims are on the increase in the direct proportion; the victims actually seldom reach to actions for damages to be fully compensated, which witness that Act is not playing its role in spite of the codification of damages. This article scrutinizes the actualities of damages actions, analyses the causes for their under-utilization and attempts to find how to make them work better. Especially, the author tries to check whether and how far the Market Oversight Commission of Korea Exchange, as institution set up for the fairness, reliability and efficiency fo the capital market, could contribute to facilitating damages against unfair trades.
    번역하기

    Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act(hereafter "the Act") provides that such the unfair trades as the abuse of non-publicized crucial information(art. 174 of the Act), the operation of market prices(art. 176 of the Act), unfair compet...

    Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act(hereafter "the Act") provides that such the unfair trades as the abuse of non-publicized crucial information(art. 174 of the Act), the operation of market prices(art. 176 of the Act), unfair competion(art. 178 of the Act) be punished so as for the actor to be in prison up to 10 years or fined up to five hundred million(art. 443 of the Act); the Act also provides that the victims of the unfair trades have access to damages(arts. 175, 177, 179 of the Act). Such regulations in both criminal as well as civil dimensions have been continually reinforced in the process of reforming the old Securities Transaction Act(s) as well as establishing the Act; in addition, Act on Securities-Related Class Actions was introduced to come into force on January 1, 2005. However, the capital market nowadays faces, notwithstanding all the legislatorial endeavors mentioned in the above, continuously increasing number of unfair trades by the hands not only of securities specialists and but also of individual investors. With the increasing number of unfair trades, the number and amount of victims are on the increase in the direct proportion; the victims actually seldom reach to actions for damages to be fully compensated, which witness that Act is not playing its role in spite of the codification of damages. This article scrutinizes the actualities of damages actions, analyses the causes for their under-utilization and attempts to find how to make them work better. Especially, the author tries to check whether and how far the Market Oversight Commission of Korea Exchange, as institution set up for the fairness, reliability and efficiency fo the capital market, could contribute to facilitating damages against unfair trades.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 문병일, "해상사건에 있어서 전문심리위원제도의 허와 실" 해상보험법연구회 4 (4): 2008

    2 김한종, "증권집단소송제도의 활성화방안에 관한 연구" 법학연구소 10 (10): 389-420, 2009

    3 손영화, "증권집단소송제도의 개선방안에 관한 고찰" 한국상사판례학회 24 (24): 45-86, 2011

    4 최정식, "증권관련집단소송법의 개선방안에 관한 고찰" 한국법학원 (102) : 152-175, 2008

    5 김정수, "자본시장법원론" 서울파이낸스앤로그룹 2011

    6 송종준, "자본시장법[주석서 1]" 한국증권법학회(박영사) 2009

    7 양기진, "자본시장법: 사례와 이론" 박영사 2012

    8 임재연, "자본시장법(2012년판)" 박영사 2012

    9 김용재, "자본시장과 법(상)" 고려대학교출판부 2011

    10 이동률, "소송구조의 현황과 개선방안" 한국민사소송법학회 14 (14): 789-818, 2010

    1 문병일, "해상사건에 있어서 전문심리위원제도의 허와 실" 해상보험법연구회 4 (4): 2008

    2 김한종, "증권집단소송제도의 활성화방안에 관한 연구" 법학연구소 10 (10): 389-420, 2009

    3 손영화, "증권집단소송제도의 개선방안에 관한 고찰" 한국상사판례학회 24 (24): 45-86, 2011

    4 최정식, "증권관련집단소송법의 개선방안에 관한 고찰" 한국법학원 (102) : 152-175, 2008

    5 김정수, "자본시장법원론" 서울파이낸스앤로그룹 2011

    6 송종준, "자본시장법[주석서 1]" 한국증권법학회(박영사) 2009

    7 양기진, "자본시장법: 사례와 이론" 박영사 2012

    8 임재연, "자본시장법(2012년판)" 박영사 2012

    9 김용재, "자본시장과 법(상)" 고려대학교출판부 2011

    10 이동률, "소송구조의 현황과 개선방안" 한국민사소송법학회 14 (14): 789-818, 2010

    11 법원행정처, "법원실무제요 민사소송[Ⅰ]"

    12 정영수, "민사소송에서의 전문심리위원에 관한 연구" 한국민사소송법학회 12 (12): 170-200, 2008

    13 임채웅, "민사소송법의 전문심리위원제도에 관한 연구" 한국민사소송법학회 11 (11): 176-202, 2007

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    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 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2012-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2011-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2010-06-17 학회명변경 영문명 : 미등록 -> The Institute for Legal Studies KCI등재후보
    2010-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보2차) KCI등재후보
    2009-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2008-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보2차) KCI등재후보
    2007-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2005-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.78 0.78 0.74
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.75 0.76 0.82 0.14
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼