Determination Of Insider Trading

In the securities market around the world, there are three kinds of unlawful even criminal acts appearing easily: the Insider Trading、the Market Manipulation、the Fraudulent Conduct. Among them, the Insider Trading not only destroies the public investment environment to a great extent, but also largely influences the building of fair securities exchange. Of course, it goes against the construction of just market orders at the same time. In a word, the Insider Trading not just damages efficiency and effectiveness of stock trading activities, also violates the good faith principle which is praised highly in Securities Law. The act that the insider takes advantages of the insider information to work on the stock trading damages the economic interest of the general social investors. In the legal practice, because of the complexity and invisibility of the insider trading, the difficulties must exist if we want to define the insider trading accurately、exactly and correctly. What’s more, a number of new-style cases about the insider trading appear inevitably with the rapid development of economy in our country, it compels us to focus and research the new-style cases in the stock area and we have to think and discuss deeply about the laws and regulations on the Insider Trading. This article researches on the act that the Everbright Securities carried out the hedging transaction between the wrong deal and the information disclosure on August 16,2013 and the case that Yang jian bo sued CSRC. Comparing the regulatory ways and relevant laws and regulations, we need to re-examine the elements and responsibility of the Insider Trading..The writer divided this article into four parts. The first part is to review the China Everbright Securities’ Fat Finger in general and state the decision of administrative penalty of CSRC and the verdict of the Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court, and then refine the three dispute focuses of the case. The second part is to analyze and define the three dispute focuses one by one through the way of combining theory with practice based on the fact and evidence. The third part is to clarify the reasons of the verdict of the Beijing First Intermediate People’s Court and indicate the writer’s view and attitude of the verdict. The fourth part is to give a summary of the case.