본문내용 바로가기

CASE RESULTS

[ Criminal_Law ][SUPREME COURT] Violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act; Violation of
2020.05.12

Supreme Court Decision 2018Do8438 Decided October 12, 2018 【Violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act; Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud)】

대법원 2018. 10. 12. 선고 2018도8438 판결 [자본시장과금융투자업에관한법률위반·특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)]

 

【Main Issues and Holdings】 판시사항

Matters to be considered when calculating “the amount equivalent to the gain accrued from the violation” to apply Article 443(1) proviso and Article 443(2) of the former Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, and whether “the gain accrued from the violation” includes both realized and unrealized gains (affirmative).

In a case where the stock price is raised by market price manipulation, method of calculating the realized gain therefrom.

구 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제443조 제1항 단서 및 제2항의 적용을 위하여 ‘위반행위로 얻은 이익의 가액’을 산정할 때 유의하여야 할 사항 및 ‘위반행위로 얻은 이익’에 실현이익과 미실현이익이 모두 포함되는지 여부(적극) / 시세조종행위로 주가를 상승시킨 경우, 그에 따른 실현이익을 산정하는 방법.

 

【Summary of Decision】 판결요지

The former Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act (amended by Act No. 11845, May 28, 2013) (hereinafter “Capital Markets Act”) prohibits market price manipulation (Article 176) and imposes criminal punishment on any person who violates pertinent provision (Article 443). The Capital Markets Act imposes aggravated punishment depending on the amount equivalent to “the profit accrued or the loss avoided by a violation,” which is defined as one of the constituent elements of crime (Article 443(1) proviso and Article 443(2)). As such, its application warrants caution to prevent the undermining of the legality principle, which ensures a reasonable balance between crime and punishment through strict and judicial calculation of the amount accrued by the violation, as well as the responsibility principle, which demands punishment be based on and proportionate to the attendant responsibility.

구 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률(2013. 5. 28. 법률 제11845호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 ‘자본시장법’이라 한다)은 시세조종행위를 금지하고(제176조), 이를 위반한 경우 형사처벌하고 있다(제443조). 자본시장법은 ‘위반행위로 얻은 이익 또는 회피한 손실’을 범죄구성요건의 일부로 삼아 그 가액에 따라 형을 가중하고 있으므로(제443조 제1항 단서 및 제2항), 이를 적용할 때에는 위반행위로 얻은 이익의 가액을 엄격하고 신중하게 산정함으로써 범죄와 형벌 사이에 적정한 균형이 이루어져야 한다는 죄형 균형의 원칙이나 형벌은 책임에 기초하고 그 책임에 비례하여야 한다는 책임주의 원칙을 훼손하지 않도록 유의하여야 한다.

 

“The profit accrued by a violation” refers to the whole of gain from the causal relationship generated by a manipulator’s violation, which encompasses both (a) the gains already accrued as a result of specific transactions conducted during the period of market price manipulation (hereinafter “realized gain”); and (b) the assessed gain of the stocks or the securities from the preemptive right to new stocks, which is subject to market price manipulation and possessed by the manipulator at the time when the pertinent market price manipulation ended (hereinafter “unrealized gain”).

‘위반행위로 얻은 이익'은 위반행위로 행위자가 얻은 인과관계에 있는 이익의 전부를 뜻하므로, 시세조종행위 기간 중에 한 구체적 거래로 인하여 이미 발생한 이익(이하 ‘실현이익’이라 한다)과 시세조종행위 종료 시점 당시 보유 중인 시세조종 대상 주식 또는 신주인수권증권의 평가이익(‘미실현이익’)이 모두 포함된다.

 

In a case where a surge in stock price is caused by market price manipulation, the realized gain therefrom is calculated as follows: [(the difference between selling price per unit and buying price per unit) × (among the quantity of stocks bought and the quantity of stocks sold, those with smaller quantity (“matched quantity of stocks bought and sold”))] – (transaction cost at the time of the disposal of the stocks). The calculation of the buying price per unit would be as follows: (a) in a case where stock acquisition was intended for acquiring gains from market price manipulation, the outcome of the weighted average of the actual purchase amount by the number of stocks bought would be the buying price per unit; (b) in a case where the stocks that were issued from the securities acquired by exercising the preemptive right to new stocks were disposed of thereafter, the buying price per unit would be equivalent to the outcome of the weighted average of the sum of the strike price of the preemptive right to new stocks and the purchase amount of the securities from the preemptive right to new stocks (hereinafter “purchase price of the preemptive right to new stocks”) by the number of stocks bought.

시세조종행위로 주가를 상승시킨 경우 그에 따른 실현이익은 ‘매도단가와 매수단가의 차액에 매매일치수량(매수수량과 매도수량 중 더 적은 수량)을 곱하여 계산한 금액’에서 ‘주식을 처분할 때 든 거래비용’을 공제하여 산정된다. 시세조종행위로 이익을 얻기 위해 주식을 취득하였다면 실제 매수가액을 매수수량으로 가중평균한 단가를 매수단가로 적용하고, 신주인수권증권을 취득한 뒤 이를 행사하여 주식을 발행받아 처분하였다면 신주인수권 행사가격에 신주인수권증권 매입가액을 더한 금액(이하 ‘신주인수권 매수가격’이라 한다)을 매수수량으로 가중평균한 단가를 매수단가로 보아야 한다.

 

However, if the acquisition of the stocks or the securities from the preemptive right to new stocks was not intended for obtaining gains through market price manipulation, the stock’s closing price on the day preceding the period of market price manipulation should be deemed as the buying price per unit. This is because the purchase price of the previously possessed stocks or the preemptive right to new stocks is irrelevant to market price manipulation.

그러나 시세조종행위로 이익을 얻기 위해 주식이나 신주인수권증권을 취득한 것이 아니라면, 시세조종기간 전일 주식의 종가를 매수단가로 보아야 한다. 기존에 보유하고 있던 주식 또는 신주인수권 매수가격은 시세조종행위와 무관하기 때문이다.

 

To sum up, if the stock’s closing price on the day preceding the period of market price manipulation (hereinafter “closing price before market price manipulation”) is set at a higher price than the purchase price of the previously possessed stocks or the preemptive right to new stocks, due to either regular price fluctuations or causes of fluctuations irrelevant to a manipulator, the gain equivalent to the difference between the closing price before market price manipulation and the purchase price of the previously possessed stocks or the preemptive right to new stocks is deemed to have been accrued irrespective of market price manipulation, and thus, the gain equivalent to the said difference cannot be deemed as “the gain accrued from the violation.” On the other hand, where the stock’s closing price on the day preceding the period of market price manipulation, which had remained at a lower price than the purchase price of the stocks or the preemptive right to new stocks, later increased to higher levels than the purchase price of the stocks or the preemptive right to new stocks because of market price manipulation, the gain equivalent to the difference between the purchase price of the stocks or the preemptive right to new stocks and the stock’s closing price on the day preceding the period of market price manipulation is deemed to have stemmed from market price manipulation, and thus, constitutes “the gain accrued by a violation.”

결국 시세조종기간 전일의 종가가 정상적인 주가변동이나 위반행위자와 무관한 변동요인으로 말미암아 기존에 보유하고 있던 주식 또는 신주인수권 매수가격보다 높다면, 그 차액만큼의 이익은 시세조종행위와 관계없이 얻은 것이어서 ‘위반행위로 얻은 이익’으로 볼 수 없다. 반면 시세조종기간 전일 종가가 주식 또는 신주인수권 매수가격보다 낮았는데 시세조종행위로 주가가 주식 또는 신주인수권 매수가격보다 상승하였다면, 주식 또는 신주인수권 매수가격과 시세조종기간 전일의 종가의 차액만큼의 이익도 시세조종행위로 형성된 것이므로 ‘위반행위로 얻은 이익’에 해당한다.

 

In the meantime, where stocks are sold during the period of market price manipulation, the selling price per unit should be determined by computing the weighted average of the actual selling amount by the quantity of stocks sold.

한편 시세조종기간에 주식이 매도된 경우 매도단가는 실제 매도가액을 매도수량으로 가중평균하는 방식으로 정하여야 한다.

 

【Disposition】 주문

The part of the lower judgment against Defendants 1 and 2 is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. The final appeals filed by Defendants 4 and 3 are dismissed.

원심판결 중 피고인 1, 피고인 2에 대한 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다. 피고인 4, 피고인 3의 상고를 기각한다.

 

Reference

Supreme Court Library of Korea 2012 <https://library.scourt.go.kr>