RISS 검색 - 국내학술지논문 상세보기

국문 초록 (Abstract)

높은 위험성이 존재하는 유가증권시장에서 정보에 대한 접근성이 매우 중시되기 때문에 모든 투자자들은 정보 취득에 있어서 동등한 접근성을 가져야 한다. 이를 달성하기 위해 대부분의 ...

높은 위험성이 존재하는 유가증권시장에서 정보에 대한 접근성이 매우 중시되기 때문에 모든 투자자들은 정보 취득에 있어서 동등한 접근성을 가져야 한다. 이를 달성하기 위해 대부분의 국가들은 내부정보를 사용함으로써 시장질서를 무너뜨리는 행위를 규제해왔다.
1970년 대에 들어 내부거래를 규제하기 시작한 호주의 경우 Corporations Legislation Amendment Act 1991 및 the Financial Services Reform Act 2001 (Cth) 등의 입법 또는 개정을 통해 유가증권시장을 활성화시키고 투명성을 유지하기 위해적극적인 움직임을 보여왔고 상대적으로 광범위하게 내부자거래를 규정하여왔으나 매우 적은 내부거래자들 만이 형사처벌을 받았다. 이와 같은 결과에 대한 주요 원인으로는 관련법규 상 내부자거래의 정의가 명백하게 명시되어 있지 않아 처벌 대상에 대한 혼란이 있어왔다는 점이다.
따라서 본 논문에서는 호주 관련 법 상 내부자거래의 정의를 살펴보고, 특히 규제대상이 되는 내부정보의 범위에 대해 연구하고자 한다. 또한 이를 토대로 호주 내부자거래 규제의 맹점을 찾고 이를 해결할 방안을 제시한다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Despite the development of the insider trading regulation for the last few decades, debates on insider trading activity and efficacy of the insider trading regime are still remaining. Indeed, very few persons have been prosecuted for insider trading since insider trading was introduced, and only small number of offenders have been successfully convicted.
Surprisingly, compared to other countries, the Australian judiciary is maintaining a relatively wide scope of insider trading offence grounded on "market fairness and market efficiency" policy. For example, the Corporation Act 2011 penalises persons for insider trading, no matter where private information comes, so far as it is characterised as material non-public one. The primary problem with respect to the Australian insider trading regime is that the definition of the elements of insider trading is not clearly stated in the Act. As a consequence, market professionals and investors are likely to fall into confusion, which might hinder investments in the securities market. Eventually, such phenomenon would bring about Australian financial market lagging behind that of other countries.
Accordingly, to begin with, the definition and rationale of insider trading will be examined. In particular, the scope of inside information will be explored thoroughly, and a main focus will be drawn to issues concerning the scope, which is the most critical point in regulating insider trading. Then, the shortcomings of the Australian insider trading regime will be pointed out, and criticized. Also, this essay will seek to suggest steps that should be taken to improve the insider trading regime especially related to korean regulatory system.

목차 (Table of Contents)

<영문요약>
1. Introduction
2. Regulations in Australia
3. Critiqueof Australian Regime
4. Reform Proposals

<영문요약>
1. Introduction
2. Regulations in Australia
3. Critiqueof Australian Regime
4. Reform Proposals
5. Conclusion
<국문초록>

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Juliette Overland, "Two steps forward, one step back: Assessing recent developments in the fight against insider trading" 24 : 207-, 2006

2 Michael Whincop, "Towards a property rights and market microstructural theory of insider trading regulation" 7 : 212-, 1996

3 Gill North, "The insider trading “generally available” and “materiality” carve‐outs: Are they achieving their aims?" 27 : 234-, 2009

4 Gregory Lyon, "The Law of Insider Trading in Australia" The Federation Press 52-, 2005

5 Overland J, "The Future of Insider Trading in Australia: What Did Rene Rivikin Teach Us?" 10 : 708-, 2006

6 Skoyles K, "The Fiduciary Basis of Insider Trading Liability: Dirks Down Under" 2 : 13-, 1984

7 Golding G, "The Continuous Evolution of Australia’s Continuous Disclosure Laws" 22 : 385-, 2004

8 Gill North, "The Australian insider trading regime: workable or hopelessly complex?" 27 : 310-, 2009

9 Robert Baxt, "Securities and Financial Services Law" LexisMexisButterworths 2008

10 Rhys Bollen, "Research analysts and the Australian insider trading and misleading or deceptive conduct regimes" 21 : 430-, 2003