What to do if someone is suspected of stock price manipulation, insider trading, falsifying financial statements, or committing special breach of trust? First, analyze the elements of the crime and the evidence.

One of the most dangerous aspects of major criminal cases under securities trading law is that different crimes often appear simultaneously in the same search warrant, indictment, or case file. Further details on procedural handling are available separately.Securities trading law research, interviews, and defense in major financial criminal cases.

For example, if a listed company is searched by prosecutors, the case may also involve:

The financial reports are false;

Manipulating stock prices;

insider trading;

Unconventional transactions;

Special breach of trust;

Commercial Accounting Law;

Criminal breach of trust or embezzlement;

Even other corporate governance and financial crimes.

But these charges are not the same thing.

The prosecutor needs to prove that the conduct, identity, subjective intent, corporate damage, material information, securities transactions, and financial data are all different.

Therefore, major securities transaction cases cannot be described in a single sentence:

"The company definitely has problems."

This leads to the conclusion that every director, manager, accountant, or person involved in the transaction is guilty of a crime.

The real starting point for the defense is to break down the "overall crime story" presented by the prosecution and examine it piece by piece:

What crime was the defendant charged with?

What are the legal requirements for constituting a crime?

What was the defendant actually responsible for at the company?

What direct evidence does the prosecution have?

Which of these are merely inferences drawn from professional titles, transaction results, or testimonies of others?

And whether the cash flow, securities transactions, company documents, and the defendant himself can actually be linked.

Article 171 of the Securities Exchange LawThe statutory penalty is very severe.

but:

Severe penalties do not mean that the elements of a crime can be omitted.

Five types of major securities trading crimes

False financial reports

Original transaction + financial process + subjective knowledge

Manipulating stock prices

Trading model + account control + market intent

insider trading

Important news + Time of awareness + Trading time

Unconventional transactions

Commercial purpose + business practice + significant damage

Special breach of trust

Job position + self-interest + company damage

I. How severe is Article 171 of the Securities Exchange Act?

The basic penalty for serious crimes stipulated in Article 171, Paragraph 1 of the Securities Exchange Law is as follows:

Imprisonment for not less than three years but not more than ten years, and may also be subject to a fine of not less than NT$10 million but not more than NT$200 million.

Related crimes include:

violationArticle 20 of the Securities Exchange LawSecurities fraud or misrepresentation of financial statements;

Market manipulation in violation of Article 155;

Insider trading in violation of Article 157-1;

Unconventional transactions by publicly traded companies that deviate from normal business practices and cause significant damage to the company;

And specific breaches of trust or misappropriation of company assets by certain directors, supervisors, or managers.

If the property or financial gain obtained through a crime reaches:

More than NT$100 million

According to Article 171, Paragraph 2, the statutory penalty is increased to:

Imprisonment for seven years or more, and may also be subject to a fine of between NT$25 million and NT$500 million.

Therefore, from the very first investigation, these types of cases are not handled in the same way as ordinary minor offenses.

But the severity of punishment is only the result.

The real first question remains:

Which crime was actually established?

II. Category One: Inaccurate Financial Statements – Errors in financial statements do not necessarily implicate every person who signs them in a serious crime.

Article 20, Paragraph 2 of the Securities Exchange Law stipulates:

The financial reports and financial documents that the issuer declares or publishes in accordance with the law must not contain any false or concealed information.

Violation of relevant regulations may further involve serious criminal liability under Article 171 of the Securities Exchange Law.

Common facts in cases of false financial statements include:

Inflating revenue;

Fictitious sales;

False purchasing;

Early recognition of income;

Delaying the recognition of losses;

Fictitious accounts receivable;

Circular transactions among related parties;

Fake transactions;

The asset value is inaccurate;

Debts or material information were not disclosed.

However, criminal cases cannot stop there:

"The financial statements were later proven to be incorrect."

Further confirmation is needed:

Who provided the original transaction information?

Who decides the details of the transaction;

Who requested the entry?

Who is responsible for the accounting procedures?

Who has the right to decide the recognition method;

Who participates in the preparation of financial statements;

Who knows if the information is true?

And to what extent the defendant possessed the relevant financial information. A detailed analysis of the transactions and accounting processes can be found in [reference needed].Defense against listed companies for false financial statements, fraudulent transactions, and commercial accounting laws.

Large companies, in particular, may have their financial reports processed through multiple layers:

business;

purchase;

finance;

Accounting;

manager;

Manager;

Board of Directors;

Accountant.

therefore:

A signature is a form of evidence, but it cannot replace an investigation into the actual role played and the degree of subjective knowledge.

Third, in cases of inaccurate financial statements, the most important thing is not to look at the financial statements first, but to go back to the "original transaction".

Suppose the prosecution alleges that the company inflated its revenue by 100 million yuan.

What truly needs to be restored typically includes:

Does the order exist?

Is the buyer genuine?

Does the goods exist?

Has the goods been shipped?

When will the acceptance be conducted?

When should the invoice be issued?

Have the accounts receivable been collected?

Where does the funding come from?

Was the goods returned again?

Whether the counterparty in the transaction is a related party;

Why is it recognized in the accounting for that period?

If you only look at the last financial statement

You will see:

"Revenue of 100 million yuan."

But what criminal cases really need to answer is:

How was this 100 million yuan figure included in the financial statements?

Therefore, cases involving inaccurate financial statements usually require simultaneous reading of:

contract;

Order;

Shipping information;

bill;

Bank cash flow;

Accounting voucher;

Financial reports;

Email;

Internal approval;

And the accountant's audit of transactions. The flow of goods and the source of payment are also related to...Criminal liability under securities trading law for sham transactions and circular transactions.

For details on personnel roles and individual responsibilities related to signatures, please refer to [link/reference].Criminal liability for financial statements of CFOs and accounting executives of listed companies.

This is why cases of financial statement misrepresentation cannot be interpreted solely through the lens of criminal law. Further discussion can be found in [reference needed].Securities Exchange Law Financial Statement Inaccuracy.

This firm has a separate office.Defense in Major Financial Criminal Cases and Securities Exchange LawA dedicated service page that integrates defense efforts related to searches, detention, transaction flows, and accounting documents.

IV. Second Category: Stock Price Manipulation – High Volume of Trading Does Not Equal Market Manipulation

Article 155 of the Securities Exchange LawVarious types of market manipulation are prohibited.

Commonly included:

To conspire with others to conduct a relative transaction;

Intending to raise or lower prices, continuously buying at high prices or selling at low prices;

Creating the appearance of active transactions;

Spreading rumors or false information can affect transaction prices;

And other direct or indirect market manipulation.

These types of cases usually occur in very large numbers:

Securities account;

Record of authorization;

Transaction records;

IP information;

Cash flow;

Account relationships;

Market price;

Trading volume;

And communications between the defendants.

But the most important conclusion to avoid is:

"There are a lot of transactions, so it's stock trading."

or:

"The stock price was inflated, so everyone who bought the stock is an accomplice."

What should really be checked is:

Which of the following conditions does the transaction meet under Article 155?

Is there any subjective intention to raise or lower prices or create the appearance of active trading?

Are the different accounts actually controlled by the same person?

Are the funds provided from the same source?

Who placed the order?

Who decides the price and quantity?

Is there collusion between the different accounts?

What impact do these transactions have on market prices or order? See related articles for further discussion.Securities Trading Act: Manipulation of Stock Prices.

Fifth, although the relative transactions appear unusual, it is still necessary to prove "collusion" and subjective intent.

For example, account A sells stocks, and at the same time account B buys them.

If there are two accounts:

The transaction time is close;

Same price;

There are many transactions.

This transaction will certainly become a focus of investigation and prosecution.

However, the specific relative transaction behaviors regulated by Article 155 of the Securities Exchange Law still involve:

Intending to influence market prices;

Conspiring with others;

Agreed price;

And conduct relative transactions.

Therefore, the transaction data itself is very important.

But we need to continue investigating:

Do A and B know each other?

Who controls the account;

Who provided the funding?

Is there any communication?

Was there a prior agreement?

How to place an order;

Purpose of the transaction.

Cannot be:

"Objectively a transaction was completed"

Directly equivalent to:

"Subjectively conspiring to manipulate".

Sixth, continuously buying at high prices or selling at low prices cannot be used to determine a crime simply by looking at a single transaction chart.

Section 155 of the Securities Exchange Act also prohibits:

The act of continuously buying at high prices or selling at low prices with the intention of raising or lowering market prices, which may affect market prices or market order.

Therefore, cases are usually analyzed as follows:

Order price;

The price of the previous transaction;

The best five gears;

Time of entrustment;

Transaction time;

Trading volume;

The proportion of market transactions;

Stock price changes;

During the transaction period;

Other market factors.

But at the same time, we also need to answer:

Why did the defendant make the transaction?

Is there a legitimate investment purpose?

Did you already hold a large number of positions?

Is it based on stop-loss, stock swap, or other market strategies?

Are there any other major news events that caused the market to fluctuate?

so:

A rise in stock price is a result, but the crime of stock price manipulation still requires analysis of human behavior and intent.

VII. The third type: Insider trading – the core is not "whether or not you made money", but four key time points.

The most crucial element in insider trading cases is often a very precise timeline. See related articles for further discussion.Insider trading cases.

according toArticle 157-1 of the Securities Exchange ActA person with a specific identity or who has obtained information, after actually becoming aware of information that has a significant impact on stock prices:

After the message was made clear;

Before it was made public;

Or within eighteen hours of its publication.

They may not buy or sell listed or over-the-counter stocks or other securities with equity characteristics, either on their own or in the name of others.

Therefore, insider trading cases usually require identifying four timeframes first:

When will major news break?

When does major news become "clear"?

When did the defendant actually become aware of the information?

When exactly is a stock order placed or executed?

If these four timeframes are not clearly defined, it will be difficult to determine whether insider trading is valid.

8. Important information is not "any secret within the company".

Not all internal company information is considered material news under the Securities Exchange Act.

The law requires:

This involves matters related to company finances, operations, securities market supply and demand, and public acquisitions.

Its specific content has a significant impact on stock prices.

Or news that could significantly influence the investment decisions of legitimate investors.

For example, commonly seen in practice:

Major mergers and acquisitions;

Significant losses;

Major investment;

Important contracts;

Significant changes in the company's financial statements;

Major litigation;

Change of management rights;

Unconventional transactions;

The assets were emptied;

Other events that could significantly impact the stock price.

However, each case still needs to be judged specifically:

What exactly is the "major news" that the prosecution refers to, and which event?

It cannot just be:

"Something happened at the company at that time."

9. The real difficulty in insider trading cases lies in: "When will the information become clear?"

For example, the company is in talks about a merger.

Upon first contact:

It may just be a preliminary exchange of opinions.

after:

Sign an NDA;

Conduct due diligence;

Discuss prices;

Sign a letter of intent;

Board resolution;

Sign a formal contract;

Final announcement.

At what stage was that major news "cleared"?

We cannot wait until:

The board of directors formally approved

Only then does it count.

It is also not because:

This is the first time someone has mentioned the possibility of a transaction.

It must already be clear.

The case needs to be reviewed:

Transaction progress;

specific content;

Probability of success;

Company internal documents;

Meeting;

Email;

And the maturity of the event itself.

Therefore, the defense of insider trading should not only focus on:

Announcement time.

The real battlefield is usually when the information is clear.

10. Even if the defendant did indeed know the information, it is still necessary to confirm whether the transaction decision was made after knowing the information.

For example, before the formation of significant information:

Regular stock sales have been arranged.

There is a pre-established asset allocation plan;

In preparation for selling shares to pay taxes, repay loans, or for other purposes;

Or the transaction decision may have already been made.

Then, a major news event occurred.

Stocks were also traded during the ban period.

Such cases still require judgment based on specific evidence.

You can check:

Past trading habits;

Record of authorization;

Email;

Financial planning;

loan;

Funding requirements;

Dealing with securities firms;

And the behavior before and after learning of important news.

Not just because:

The trade occurred near a major news event.

Then skip the other constituent elements.

XI. Category Four: Unconventional Transactions – A company losing money does not necessarily mean that the transaction is criminal.

Article 171, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2 of the Securities Exchange Act regulates:

Directors, supervisors, managers, or employees of a company that has issued securities in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Act, directly or indirectly, cause the company to engage in transactions that are unfavorable to the company and contrary to normal business practices, resulting in significant damage to the company.

These types of cases may include:

Purchase assets at high prices;

Selling company assets at a low price;

Unreasonable related-party transactions;

Abnormal investments;

Funds lending;

Taking on clearly unreasonable risks for other companies;

Contracts lacking commercial viability.

However, business operations inherently involve risks.

An investment ultimately failed;

The product was unsuccessful;

Market reversal;

The trade later resulted in a loss.

This does not mean that it can be directly deduced in retrospect:

"It must have been against standard business practices back then."

What we really need to see is:

What information was available at the time of the decision-making process?

How prices are formed;

Is there an appraisal?

Are there any other solutions?

Does the transaction align with the company's business objectives?

How the board of directors discusses this;

Have the conflicts of interest been disclosed?

And what significant damage the company has suffered.

12. Business decisions that appear poor in hindsight should not be directly equated with crimes.

Criminal courts do not use:

"If I were the boss, I wouldn't do this deal."

To determine whether a crime has been committed.

Business decisions sometimes exist in the first place:

risk;

Incomplete information;

Market forecasts were incorrect;

It even turned out to be a complete failure in hindsight.

Therefore, in defense, one should:

At the time of the decision

and:

Subsequent results

separate.

If it existed at that time:

Reasonable business purpose;

Market data;

Financial valuation;

Third-party quotes;

Professional advice;

Board discussion;

risk assessment;

Comparison of alternative solutions

This information may be very important.

Thirteenth, Category Five: Special Breach of Trust under the Securities Trading Law – This is not just ordinary breach of trust with a different name.

Article 171, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 3 of the Securities Exchange Act regulates:

Directors, supervisors, or managers of companies that have issued securities in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Act.

Intending to benefit oneself or a third party

However, this constitutes misconduct in the course of one's duties or misappropriation of company assets.

And caused the company damages amounting to NT$5 million.

This could constitute a special breach of trust under the Securities Exchange Act or related serious criminal liability.

Therefore, the case must at least be handled as follows:

Does the actor possess the legally defined identity?

What are his duties and authority?

Which task was violated?

Whether it was oneself or a third party who obtained the benefit;

What exactly was the damage to the company?

Whether the damages meet the statutory threshold;

Whether the individual has the legally required interest or purpose.

Not just because:

The board made a deal that caused the company to lose money.

This constitutes a special breach of trust. For related issues, please refer to [link/reference needed].Cases of breach of trust by company executives.

Fourteen, One of the most common controversies surrounding special breach of trust: How much damage did the company actually suffer?

Article 171, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 3 of the Securities Exchange Act has a clear threshold for corporate damages.

Therefore, "damage" is not a problem that can be ignored.

For example, a company:

Selling assets at low prices;

Purchase of related-party assets at inflated prices;

Pay consultant fees;

Investee companies;

The loan was given to a third party.

The prosecution may argue that the company suffered losses.

However, the defense should further question:

What is a reasonable market price?

Did the company receive any other consideration?

Does the transaction include any accompanying benefits?

Did the company originally have a payment obligation?

Is the damage actually occurring, or is it just an estimate?

Is the valuation method reasonable?

Did the profits subsequently earned by the company deduct from the total profits?

In major financial criminal cases:

The amount of damages is often a key point of contention in determining the elements of a crime and the severity of the punishment.

15. If the company's damages do not reach 5 million yuan, are there no criminal liabilities at all?

That's not how it should be understood either.

Article 171, Paragraph 3 of the Securities Exchange Law stipulates:

If the company's damages do not reach NT$5 million for the conduct described in the first item, paragraph 3, it shall be punished in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code regarding business embezzlement or breach of trust.

therefore:

"The threshold of 5 million yuan for special breach of trust has not been met."

Not necessarily equal to:

"There is no criminal liability whatsoever."

Instead, we must return to the specific act and then determine whether other crimes under criminal law have been committed.

This also shows that:

Special breach of trust under the Securities Exchange Act

and

Criminal law general breach of trust, embezzlement

It is essential to make a clear distinction.

16. Unconventional transactions and special breaches of trust are similar, but not entirely the same.

Unconventional transactions under Section 171, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2 of the Securities Exchange Act, and special breach of trust under Subparagraph 3, are often discussed together in major financial criminal cases.

However, both are standardized:

Behavioral patterns;

Identity of the actor;

Subjective elements;

Damage elements

Not exactly the same.

Therefore, it cannot be based solely on a transaction involving a related party:

"It looks weird."

They apply the same method to all crimes without distinguishing between them.

During the defense, the prosecution should be asked to specifically point out:

Should we advocate for the second or the third option?

Where is the non-compliance with business practices?

Where is the breach of duty found?

Who benefits?

How is significant damages to a company calculated?

What was the defendant's actual role? See relevant transaction analysis for details.Defenses against hollowing out, unconventional transactions, and special breaches of trust by listed companies.

17. The most common mistake in major securities law cases: treating company employee titles directly as criminal liability.

Commonly seen within listed companies:

Chairman;

director;

President;

Chief Financial Officer;

Accounting supervisor;

Legal services;

Business supervisor;

purchase;

General staff.

However, criminal liability is not automatically generated by professional titles.

For example:

The chairman may not be aware of every single accounting entry;

The accounting supervisor may not necessarily participate in front-end fraudulent transactions;

Directors may not necessarily know how securities accounts are operated;

Employees may not be aware of the profit-sharing arrangements among directors.

Therefore, one of the first things to do in defending a major financial criminal case is to create:

Job duties and authority diagram.

To answer clearly:

Who is responsible for what?

Who has the decision-making power?

Who is merely carrying out the orders?

Who can access which information?

Who attended which meetings?

Who actually controls the account?

18. The same piece of evidence may represent completely different things in different charges.

For example, an email might say:

"Take care of this matter tomorrow."

In cases of financial statement misrepresentation,

It may be necessary to determine whether to instruct the modification of accounting information.

In special cases of breach of trust

This could be interpreted as driving a certain transaction.

In insider trading cases,

It could be used to prove that the defendant was aware of material information.

Therefore, criminal defense cannot stop just because it sees a piece of unfavorable text.

We must return to:

Email context;

Complete dialogue;

time;

sender;

recipient;

What was the company doing at that time?

And what actually happened afterward.

Evidence taken out of context and evidence in the complete context may have completely different meanings.

19. Why is it necessary to create a cross-tabulation of "people, money, transactions, and documents" in major financial cases?

The amount of data related to securities trading law cases is enormous.

If you are only looking at the files in order:

Book 1;

Book Two;

Book 3;

It is easy to lose sight of the overall case structure.

A more efficient approach is usually to establish something else:

people

What are the responsibilities of each defendant, witness, and company employee?

money

From whom does the money flow to whom?

trade

How do transactions involving stocks, assets, commodities, or companies occur?

document

Which contract, subpoena, email, or board record supports which fact?

In addition:

time

When does everything happen?

Once these five lines overlap,

Only then can we truly see whether the prosecution's crime story is complete.

20. Obtaining property or benefits of 100 million yuan through crime is a very important dividing line for criminal penalties.

Article 171, Paragraph 2 of the Securities Exchange Act stipulates:

If the crime described in the first paragraph results in the acquisition of property or financial benefits exceeding NT$100 million,

The severity of the punishment has been increased to:

Seven years or more imprisonment

They may also be subject to a fine of between NT$25 million and NT$500 million.

therefore:

One hundred million yuan is not a common sentencing reference figure, but may directly affect the applicable statutory penalty.

Therefore, the following often occurs in cases:

How exactly are the profits from crime calculated?

Is it the total transaction amount?

Price difference?

What losses were avoided?

Personal interests?

Third-party interests?

What costs should be considered?

How should the benefits obtained by the different defendants be allocated?

These could all become very important points of contention in the entity dispute.

We cannot only see:

"Transaction amount of one billion yuan"

It is directly equivalent to:

"Profits from the crime amounted to one billion yuan."

21. Proceeds of crime and the amount of money involved in criminal transactions cannot be directly equated.

For example, cases of market manipulation:

The total transaction amount could be very large.

But Article 171, paragraph 2, focuses on:

Property or property benefits obtained through crime.

Insider trading may also involve:

Transaction amount;

Profit;

Avoid losses

Different numbers, etc.

Special acts of treachery may also occur simultaneously:

Company damages;

personal interests;

Third-party interests.

Therefore, at least the following should be considered in the case:

Transaction amount;

Company damages;

Profiting from crime;

Civil compensation;

Confiscated

separate.

They are not the same number.

22. Confessions made during investigations and the surrender of proceeds of crime may directly affect statutory sentence reductions, but these decisions should not be made hastily.

Article 171 of the Securities Exchange LawSpecial provisions exist for surrendering oneself to the authorities, confessing, and surrendering proceeds of crime.

For example, if a person surrenders himself or voluntarily surrenders all proceeds of crime under certain conditions, the law provides for mitigation or exemption from punishment.

Confessing during the investigation and voluntarily surrendering all proceeds of crime may result in a reduced sentence in accordance with the law.

but:

Whether or not to confess is a very important defense decision in major criminal cases.

We cannot simply rely on what we see:

"Confession can reduce sentence"

He immediately admitted to all the crimes committed by the prosecution.

Must be confirmed first:

What did the defendant actually do?

Prosecution evidence;

Scope of crime;

The issue of joint principal offenders;

How are proceeds of crime calculated?

And the impact of admitting guilt on other charges, civil liability, and confiscation.

Especially in major financial cases involving multiple individuals,

One person's testimony may also directly affect other defendants.

Therefore, such decisions should be made after thorough analysis of the case file, rather than hastily during the first inquiry.

23. When a case involves both commercial accounting law and criminal elements, the two sets of elements must be separated.

Cases of false financial statements are often seen together:

Securities Exchange Law;

Commercial Accounting Law;

Criminal law forgery of documents.

However, these three are not the same crime.

The focus of commercial accounting law may be on:

Accounting vouchers;

Account books;

Financial statements;

Accounting matters;

Inaccurate record.

Securities trading rules further address:

Public offering;

Securities market;

Investor information;

Financial reporting and serious criminal liability.

Therefore, when a company has a false accounting record,

Must be confirmed:

Which document is it?

Who made it;

Who uses it;

Whether to include it in public financial statements;

Defendant's identity;

Subjective intent;

And the constituent elements of each law.

Not just because:

There's a problem with the accounts.

All charges should be upheld. See related articles for further information.Commercial accounting law and financial statement misrepresentation.

24. Major financial cases may have similar evidentiary structures to embezzlement cases, but their legal requirements are completely different.

Large-scale white-collar crime cases often share similar investigative patterns:

search;

Multiple people were interviewed;

Large cash flow;

Company or government documents;

Communication records;

Detention;

The co-defendants gave their statements.

Such cases are related to securities trading law.

This is also common in major cases of embezzlement, bribery, and profiteering.

Therefore, criminal defense in both types of cases requires:

Rebuild the decision-making process;

Analyze cash flows;

Distinguish roles;

Examine the subjective intent of the offender;

Organize a large number of case files;

And handle the detention procedures.

but:

The legal elements constituting securities trading crimes and embezzlement crimes are completely different.

The charges should not be mixed up just because the procedures are similar.

FDLAW has a separate case handling framework for major corporate criminal and corruption cases. See also...Major embezzlement, bribery and profiteering criminal cases.

25. Attorney Li Yusheng has also publicly explained on numerous occasions the serious crimes under the Securities Exchange Law.

In addition to recently handling major criminal cases related to securities trading, lawyer Li Yusheng has also given media interviews in the past, publicly stating:

Manipulating stock pricescrime;

insider trading;

False financial reports;

And related criminal liabilities under securities trading laws.

These cases share a common characteristic:

Don't just look at the crime names in the news.

Once you truly enter the realm of criminal defense, you must return to:

trade;

time;

Position;

document;

Cash flow;

The connection with the defendant himself.

Especially when the case involves:

search;

Detention;

A large amount of financial data;

Multiple defendants

The earlier the different elements of a crime are separated, the less likely the case will be reduced to a single version of the prosecution's story. For information on applying for detention, please refer to [further details].Detention and Custody Court Battles in Securities Trading Law Cases.

26. Fidelity Law Firm recently took on another major criminal case related to securities trading law.

Fidelity Law Firm has recently been reappointed to handle a major securities transaction law criminal case.

The case involves multiple defendants, investigative detention procedures, and a large amount of corporate, financial, securities transaction, and criminal case files. Attorney Li Yusheng participated in reviewing the case files and providing criminal defense.

Attorney Li Yusheng previously served as the legal director of a large accounting firm. Therefore, when handling major financial criminal cases, he not only starts from the criminal law provisions but also reads:

Company transactions;

Board of Directors and Internal Decision-Making;

Accounting vouchers;

Financial statements;

Bank cash flow;

Securities trading;

Other original business information.

Based on the principles of non-disclosure of investigations, protecting the privacy of the client, and safeguarding the interests of the defense, our firm will not disclose case numbers, defendant names, or specific details of investigations that have not yet been made public, nor will we use undetermined case outcomes for publicity.

For company executives, directors, senior managers, financial accountants, or transaction stakeholders facing serious financial criminal charges,

The first thing to deal with is not guessing:

"How long will the sentence be in the end?"

Instead, confirm first:

Which crime will the prosecution use, and what evidence will they link to you?

Securities Trading Law Major Criminal Liability FAQ

What is the maximum sentence under Article 171 of the Securities Exchange Act?

The basic penalty for serious crimes under Article 171, Paragraph 1, is imprisonment for a term of not less than three years but not more than ten years, and may also be subject to a fine of not less than NT$10 million but not more than NT$200 million. If the property or property benefits obtained as a result of the crime reach NT$100 million or more, the penalty under Article 171, Paragraph 2, shall be increased to imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years, and may also be subject to a higher fine.

Does a large volume of stock trading and a rise in stock price necessarily constitute stock price manipulation?

Not necessarily. It is still necessary to confirm whether the behavior conforms to the specific manipulation patterns specified in Section 155 of the Securities Exchange Act, and whether there is any subjective intent to raise or lower prices, create the appearance of active trading, or otherwise influence the market. Transaction records, account control, sources of funds, and market data all need to be analyzed together.

Does buying stock after learning about significant company news necessarily constitute insider trading?

It is still necessary to confirm whether the perpetrator falls under the scope of legal regulation, whether the material information has been clearly defined, when the defendant actually became aware of it, when the information was made public, and exactly when the stock transaction occurred. The timeline is usually a crucial element in insider trading cases.

If a company's financial statements contain errors, will someone necessarily be charged with the crime of making false financial statements?

Not necessarily. Further investigation is needed to examine any false or concealed information, the original transactions, the perpetrator's position, actual participation, level of knowledge, and subjective intent. Financial reports of large companies are typically prepared by multiple people and different departments; one cannot presume the entirety of the crime based solely on job titles or signatures.

If a director makes a transaction that causes the company to lose money, does that constitute special breach of trust?

Not necessarily. Special breach of trust under securities trading law still requires analysis of the actor's identity, position, breach of duty, subjective intent to benefit themselves or a third party, and damage to the company. Failure of business judgment and intentional breach of trust in criminal cases are not the same thing.

Does a company that commits exceptional breach of trust and causes damages of less than 5 million yuan have absolutely no criminal liability?

Not necessarily. Article 171, Paragraph 3 of the Securities Exchange Law stipulates that if the conduct in Paragraph 1, Item 3 causes damage to the company but does not reach 5 million yuan, the case may be judged according to the provisions of criminal law such as embezzlement or breach of trust.

Does a case involving a transaction amount exceeding 100 million yuan necessarily qualify for the sentence of seven years or more under Article 171, Paragraph 2?

No. Article 171, Paragraph 2 stipulates that the amount of property or financial gain obtained through a crime must reach NT$100 million or more, not simply the total transaction amount. How to calculate the criminal gains may itself be a key point of contention in the case.

Is confessing during an investigation always more advantageous?

It cannot be generalized. The Securities and Exchange Act does provide for sentence reduction for confessions and surrender of proceeds of crime that meet certain conditions during investigations. However, whether or not to confess involves the scope of the crime, co-defendants, proceeds of crime, other charges, and subsequent responsibilities. This should be decided after understanding the evidence. One should not hastily admit to all criminal facts just because one sees the words "sentence reduction".

The real defense in securities trading law cases is not to deny all financial crimes.

Major financial criminal cases often involve very large case files.

A truly effective defense is not just a single sentence:

"I have no idea."

Instead, it distinguishes precisely:

What do you know?

What things are unknown;

What are the duties of one's job?

What are the tasks of other departments?

Which transactions actually occurred;

Which of these are merely legal assessments by the prosecution?

And which element of the crime truly lacks evidence.

To determine whether stock prices are being manipulated, one must examine transactions, accounts, and market intentions.

Insider trading requires attention to major news and timing;

Inaccurate financial statements require a return to the original transactions and financial processes.

Unconventional transactions must be examined in terms of both commercial viability and potential harm to the company.

Special breaches of trust depend on the position, the purpose of the act, and the specific harm caused.

If the case has entered the stages of search, interview, detention or prosecution, the relevant legal provisions, company positions, major transactions, timelines and current case files should be reorganized before deciding on the true defense focus for each crime.