| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 法學院碩士在職專班 === 102 === The purpose of this thesis is to discuss the “non-arm’s length crime” of Paragraph 1, Subparagraph2 of Article 171 of the ROC Securities Transaction Act. “Non-arm’s length crime” was promulgated during the year 2000 to meet the growing economic crime.
The said Articles have the same coverage with others in some perspectives, such as rule regarding contrary normal business conduction within affiliated enterprises in Article 43-1 of Income Tax Act and Article 369-4 of Company Act. The legal elements, legal interest protection and constituent element of a crime, are not concrete. The lack of clear definitions make people confuse.
The said Articles used terms such as “non-arm’s length transaction”, “harmful transaction” and “substantial damage” and such terms are uncertain legal concepts. For example, it is not certain whether uncertain legal concepts violate the constitution of ROC or the term “non-arm’s length” means a non-customary transaction that is different from the commercial norm or if such means the non-arms length transaction as pursuant to the tax law? What are types of decisions made by the entrepreneur that should be reviewed (or is appropriate to be reviewed) by the court? Such are the issues that require further analysis.
How can the “non-arm’s length crime” of Paragraph 1, Subparagraph2 of Article 171 of the ROC Securities Transaction Act be clearly defined or amended by the legislature so as to meet the original goal of the legislator, or to avoid unnecessary expansion of the scope of applicability of uncertain terms and thereby impede the creativity of business activity to break or go beyond the norm of business. Such is the goal that we would like to achieve with this thesis.
|
|---|
