지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2004.12
- 수록면
- 327 - 353 (27page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The recent Enron Corp. securities fraud case and the relevant court decisions in the US suggests many aspects of the future development in connection with a professional's liability for a securities fraud. The Enron Corp.'s illegality in its accounting that had been committed tactfully and widely could not have taken place had there not been the participation or tacit consent by its external audit firm, Arthur Andersen. The fact that an external audit firm, which is in charge of catching any illegality in accounting, was rather deeply involved with Enron's illegality raised a serious issue with respect to the role and liability of professionals in the securities markets.
In the recent years, it is very rare that a single person commits a securities fraud. In particular, as the securities related tasks have become highly complicated and the role of an account or lawyer has become more important, the number of securities cases in which a professional is involved is on the rise. Since a securities fraud in which a professional is involved tends to entail a more substantial damages and harm the trust on which a securities market is built, it is a reality that some sort of regulation is unavoidable. However, a securities fraud committed by a professional may be differentiated from a typical securities fraud in that a professional plays a secondary role in assistance to a primary actor. The on-going debate on this issue in the US centers around the issue of the basis under which a professional engaged in a securities fraud should become liable for the same securities fraud.
This article will first look at how the inclusive anti-fraud provisions of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, Section 10 (b) and Rule l0b-5 are applied to a securities fraud committed by a professional, then provide an overview of the judgment in the Central Bank case rendered by the US Supreme Court, which excluded the aiding and abetting liability, and the three tests to find a professional's liability for securities frauds as subsequently adopted by the lower US federal courts, such as the bright line test, substantial participation test and co-author test, and analyze the merits and demerits of the three test respectively. This article will further analyze the contents of the judgment recently rendered in the Enron Corp. case and its significance. Lastly, this article will discuss whether it is necessary to introduce an inclusive anti-fraud provision such as section 10 (b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 in the Korean legal system.
In the recent years, it is very rare that a single person commits a securities fraud. In particular, as the securities related tasks have become highly complicated and the role of an account or lawyer has become more important, the number of securities cases in which a professional is involved is on the rise. Since a securities fraud in which a professional is involved tends to entail a more substantial damages and harm the trust on which a securities market is built, it is a reality that some sort of regulation is unavoidable. However, a securities fraud committed by a professional may be differentiated from a typical securities fraud in that a professional plays a secondary role in assistance to a primary actor. The on-going debate on this issue in the US centers around the issue of the basis under which a professional engaged in a securities fraud should become liable for the same securities fraud.
This article will first look at how the inclusive anti-fraud provisions of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, Section 10 (b) and Rule l0b-5 are applied to a securities fraud committed by a professional, then provide an overview of the judgment in the Central Bank case rendered by the US Supreme Court, which excluded the aiding and abetting liability, and the three tests to find a professional's liability for securities frauds as subsequently adopted by the lower US federal courts, such as the bright line test, substantial participation test and co-author test, and analyze the merits and demerits of the three test respectively. This article will further analyze the contents of the judgment recently rendered in the Enron Corp. case and its significance. Lastly, this article will discuss whether it is necessary to introduce an inclusive anti-fraud provision such as section 10 (b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 in the Korean legal system.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 증권사기에 있어서 전문가의 역할과 중요성, 특징
Ⅲ. 전문가의 증권사기와 1934년 증권거래법 제10조 (b)항 및 Rule 10b-5의 적용
Ⅳ. 센트럴뱅크판결과 전문가의 증권사기책임에 대한 하급심법원들의 판단기준
Ⅴ. 전문가의 증권사기책임에 대한 최근의 동향과 엔론판결
Ⅵ. 맺는말 - 전문가의 증권사기책임과 포괄적 사기금지조항의 도입필요성
참고 문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
신용장 거래에 있어서 중국의 사기예외 적용규정에 관한 연구
관세학회지
2008 .02
-
화환신용장에서의 ‘Fraud Rule’의 적용기준과 유형에 관한 연구
문화산업연구
2004 .12
-
Fraud Triangle Theory and Identification of Financial Fraud From China’s Listed Company
국제회계연구
2014 .12
-
신용장거래에서 연지급확약할인의 유효성에 관한 연구 -사기의 원칙 적용을 중심으로-
중재연구
2011 .01
-
신용장거래에 있어서 Fraud Rule의 적용범위에 관한 연구
관세학회지
2009 .02
-
증권소송에서의 인과관계이론의 재조명 : 미국 판례동향의 시사점
저스티스
2014 .10
-
신용장에 의한 대금결제구조에서 서류의 사기또는 위조에 관한 고찰
무역연구
2013 .01
-
국내외 투자사기의 유형별 실태 연구
형사정책연구
2011 .12
-
貨煥信用狀에서 詐欺除外法則(Fraud Exception Rule)이 개설신청인이나 제3당사자의 사기에도 적용되는가?
무역학회지
2004 .04
-
미국 판례법상 시장사기이론(The fraud on-the-market theory)과 증권거래법상 損害賠償責任에 있어서 因果關係의 문제
비교사법
2004 .03
-
분식회계 자발적 공시기업의 회계정보의 주가 관련성
한국경영학회 융합학술대회
2007 .08
-
사기범죄의 실태에 관한 연구
형사정책연구원 연구총서
1992 .12
-
증권시장 사기규제의 법경제학
법경제학연구
2012 .12
-
사이버증권거래상의 불공정거래
증권법연구
2001 .12
-
증권거래법상 불공정거래행위 금지규정에 관한 연구 : 사모증권에 대한 적용가능성을 중심으로
비교사법
2007 .03
-
교통사고환자의 장기입원과 사기행위
형사정책연구
2009 .03
-
Value Relevance of Accounting Information after Voluntary Disclosure of Fraud in Past Periods
한국로고스경영학회 학술발표대회논문집
2008 .05
-
사기예방을 위한 영국의 정책과 네트워크및 시사점 연구
경찰학논총
2018 .01
-
무상의 편면적 급부와 사기죄의 성부-주로 일본의 논의를 중심으로-
비교형사법연구
2012 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-360-019488848