미국 연방증권거래법 Section 10(b)에 기한 사적소송과 그 역외적용에 관한 고찰 = A Study on the Private Action under Section 10(b) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and its Extraterritorial Application

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(Exchange Act) is one of the most popular anti-fraud provisions in the U.S. Section 10(b) makes it unlawful to use or employ any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in connection with the purchase or sale of any security registered on a national securities exchange or any security not so registered. Under this provision, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) promulgated Rule 10b-5. Although the Exchange Act has no explicit provision regarding any civil liability for violation of Section 10(b), the courts have allowed injured investors to seek an implied private right of action under that provision. Class actions are commonly used for securities litigation because securities law violations often involves many claimants. Because of the high number of class action lawsuits in the U.S., corporations are exposed to huge financial risk.
Section 10(b) could apply extraterritorially. In order to support the extraterritorial application of Section 10(b), U.S. courts developed the effects and conduct tests. Under the effects test, U.S. courts have subject matter jurisdiction when the transactions involve stock registered and listed on a national exchange, and are detrimental to the interests of American investors. Under the conduct test, U.S. courts have subject matter jurisdiction when the defendant's activities in the United States were more than merely preparatory to a securities fraud and these activities in the U.S. directly caused the claimed losses. A number of scholars and foreign entities criticized the effects and conduct tests because these tests were unpredictable and excessively broad. Recognizing these critiques, the U.S. Supreme Court in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd. rejected the effects and conduct tests, and newly adopted the transactional test. Under the transactional test, Section 10(b) applies only to transactions in securities listed on domestic exchanges and domestic transactions in other securities.
Right after Morrison, the　Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010(Dodd-Frank Act). In particular, Section 929Y of the Dodd-Frank Act directed the SEC　to conduct a study on extraterritorial private rights of action. To comply with Section 929Y, the SEC issued a report titled “Study on the Cross-Border Scope of the Private Right of Action Under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.” In this report, the SEC provided six options for consideration. The options are divided into two categories: the options regarding the conduct and effects test, and the options to supplement and clarify the transactional test. The options to supplement and clarify the transactional test are more appropriate than the options regarding the conduct and effects test because of international comity concerns. Since the SEC's report was released, the Congress have never enacted any law regarding extraterritoriality of the private right of action under Section 10(b). Thus, the transactional test is the only standard that must be considered when determining the extraterritoriality of the private right of action under Section 10(b).
Under the first prong of the transactional test, Section 10(b) applies only to transactions in securities listed on U.S. securities exchanges. Specifically, Section 10(b) applies to purchase or sale of ADRs(American Depository Receipts) or issuer's underlying common shares on a U.S. securities exchange. However, Section 10(b) does not apply to purchase or sale of ADRs or issuer’s underlying common shares within a foreign country.
Under the second prong of the transactional test, Section 10(b) applies to U.S. domestic transactions in any securities that is not listed on a U.S. securities exchange. With regard to the second prong of the transactional test, it is questionable exactly when the transaction occurs. A district court held that Section 10(b) does not apply...

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 최승재, "효율적 시장가설의 규범 포섭 －시장사기이론의 적용한계의 획정을 중심으로－" 한국증권법학회 12 (12): 73-110, 2011
• 2 금융감독원, "해외증시상장을 통한 해외직접금융 활성화방안 추진"
• 3 "한국예탁결제원 증권정보포털 (SEIBro)"
• 4 박철희, "증권집단소송과 화해" 경인문화사 2007
• 5 허항진, "증권법 역외적용의 합리적 기준 및 범위에 대한 연구 ―미국증권법의 불공정거래에 대한 역외적용 사례를 중심으로―" 한국증권법학회 9 (9): 315-367, 2008
• 6 김건식, "증권거래법의 역외적용 및 외국감독기관과의 공조제도 정비방안 연구" 금융감독위원회 2004
• 7 정찬형, "주해 금융법(III) 자본시장법1" 한국사법행정학회 2013
• 8 김건식, "자본시장법" 박영사 2010
• 9 임재연, "자본시장법" 박영사 2013
• 10 임재연, "미국증권법" 박영사 2009
• 11 김건식, "미국의 증권규제" 홍문사 2001
• 12 허항진, "국제증권시장의 법과 실무" 세창출판사 2009
• 13 서완석, "국제증권거래에 대한 미국의 사물재판관할권" 한국기업법학회 13 : 309-326, 2003
• 14 석광현, "국제자본시장법의 서론적 고찰 －역외적용 및 역외투자자문업자 등의 특례를 중심으로－" 한국증권법학회 11 (11): 27-82, 2010
• 15 Thomas Lee Hazen, "Treatise on the Law of Securities Regulation" 2014
• 16 Stephen J. Choi, "Transnational Litigation and Global Securities Class-Action Lawsuits" 2009 (2009): 2009
• 17 Sec., "Study on the Cross-Border Scope of the Private Right of Action Under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 As Required by Section 929Y of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act"
• 18 Thomas Lee Hazen, "Securities Regulation" 2006
• 19 Donna M. Nagy, "Securities Litigation and Enforcement: Cases and Materials" 2008
• 20 Merritt B. Fox, "Securities Class Actions Against Foreign Issuers" 64 (64): 2012
• 21 장근영, "Sarbanes-Oxley Act의 외국법인에 대한 적용 - 미국증권법의 역외적용과 관련하여 -" 한국상사법학회 22 (22): 299-317, 2003
• 22 John C. Coffee, Jr., "Regulation: Cases and Materials" 2012
• 23 Kun Young Chang, "Multinational Enforcement of U.S. Securities Laws: The Need for the Clear and Restrained Scope of Extraterritorial Subject-Matter Jurisdiction" 9 (9): 2003
• 24 Hannah L. Buxbaum, "Multinational Class Actions Under Federal Securities Law: Managing Jurisdictional Conflict" 46 (46): 2007
• 25 "Letter from Hannah L. Buxbaum, Comments on Study on Extraterritorial Private Rights of Action Release No. 34-63174, File No. 4-617, 1"
• 26 J. William Hicks, "International Dimensions of U.S. Securities Law" 2012
• 27 Harold S. Bloomenthal, "International Capital Markets and Securities Regulation"
• 28 Junsun Park, "Global Expansion of National Securities Laws: Extraterritoriality and Jurisdictional Conflicts" 12 (12): 2014
• 29 Richard Painter, "Douglas Dunham & Ellen Quackenbos, When Courts and Congress Don’t Say What They Mean: Initial Reactions to Morrison v. National Australia Bank and to the Extraterritorial Jurisdiciton Provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act" 20 (20): 2011
• 30 "Cornerstone Research, Securities Class Action Case Filings 2006: A Year in Review 3"
• 31 Noam Noaked, "A New Playbook for Global Securities Litigation and Regulation, Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation"