2017년 자본시장법 주요 판례의 검토와 평가

This paper is an interpretation of the facts and issues related to the case law on the Capital Market and Financial Investment Business Act of 2017. There is a case in which the meaning of material nonpublic information is understood by the market impact standard. The price impact criterion is to judge whether the information can have a significant impact on the price of the securities if it is assumed that general investors know it. In practice, it is not significantly different from the materiality/plausibility criterion. In the case that the information is recognized as one factor in the securities transaction, it is regarded as a transaction using the information. And the case acknowledges the exceptional circumstances in which the information was not used. Also, in connection with the information on mass acquisition and disposition of stock, etc., 'the person who got acquainted' is understood as the person who has tipped the information. It is clear that insiders(tippers) need to be aware of the fact that they are communicating the information they have learned in the pursuit of their job. However, the information on massive acquisitions and disposals delivered does not constitute a nonpublic information if it is merely an indication of the transfer of nonpublic information, or it is vague and abstract. If it is internally generated in relation to the business of the listed corporation, it may be recognized that it is related to the business even if some external factors or market information are combined. The so-called scalping behavior is an act of unhealthy business, which is the act of selling capital stock to the stock market before the recommendation of the securities in the securities broadcasting. And the behavior is regarded as the use of unfair means prohibited by the law and the use of deceptive scheme.