违规披露、不披露重要信息罪的法益证成与教义学解读——基于《刑法修正案(十一)》的立法修正  

Justification of Legal Interest and Interpretation of Dogmatics of the Crime of llegally Disclosing or Failing to Disclose Important Information--Legislative Amendment Based on the Amendment(XI)to the Criminal Law

作　　者：商浩文[1] Shang Haowen

机构地区：[1]北京师范大学法学院暨刑事法律科学研究院

出　　处：《法学》2023年第4期63-73,共11页Law Science

基　　金：国家社会科学基金一般项目《资本市场变革下证券犯罪刑法制裁体系研究》(22BFX045)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：为了有效惩治信息披露违法行为,《刑法修正案(十一)》因应新《证券法》中证券发行注册等资本制度改革,对违规披露、不披露重要信息罪作了重大修改。立法修改后,该罪的形式法益体现为信息披露制度,实质法益应界定为金融信用。在司法适用中,应以《证券法》规范等前置法为依据来确定其犯罪主体,对控股股东、实际控制人进行实质认定;在入罪判断标准上,应当依据不同的犯罪主体区分相关犯罪行为类型;直接责任人员与控股股东、实际控制人身份竞合时,应结合利益归属、是否利用支配力等因素确定直接责任人员及其刑事责任范围。In order to effectively punish illegal acts of information disclosure,the Criminal Law Amendment(XI)has made major amendments to the crime in response to the reform of capital system such as securities registration in the new Securities Law.After the legislative amendment,the formal legal interest of the crime is embodied in the information disclosure system,and the substantive legal interest should be defined as financial credit.In the judicial application,the criminal subject should be judged based on the pre-law regulated by the securities law,and the controlling shareholder and the actual controller should be identified in substance.In terms of the criteria of conviction,the relevant types of criminal acts should be distinguished according to different criminal subjects.When the directly responsible person competes with the controlling shareholder and the actual controller,the directly responsible person and the scope of criminal responsibility should be defined in combination with the ownership of interests,whether to use the dominant power and other factors.

关 键 词：违规披露、不披露重要信息罪 法益侵害 控股股东 实际控制人 直接责任人员 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]