內線交易－(4)私取理論｜United States v. O'Hagan (1997)
在信賴關係理論限縮主體之後，法院意識到範圍過於狹隘，所以後來又逐漸擴張。上一篇內線交易－(3)消息傳遞理論｜Dirks v. SEC(1983)所提到的消息傳遞理論雖然解決了外部人以不正當方式取得內線消息的問題，可是還有一個問題未解決，那就是外部人雖然正當取得內線消息但卻不正當的使用該消息的情況，而此問題將在United States v. O’Hagan, 521 U.S. 642 (1997)中所發展出來的「私取理論」有所緩解。
United States v. O’Hagan
Fact
James Herman O’Hagan was a partner at the law firm of Dorsey & Whitney, which represented Grand Met in its tender offer to acquire Pillsbury Company’s stock. Although not directly involved in this representation, James O’Hagan learned about the confidential corporate takeover plan and started purchasing Pillsbury stock call options and shares. Following the public announcement of the tender offer, the price of Pillsbury’s stock surged, leading to substantial profits for O’Hagan.
James O’Hagan 是 Dorsey & Whitney 律師事務所的合夥人，該律師事務受 Grand Met委任處理收購 Pillsbury股票的事宜。此次案件中 James O’Hagan並未參與其中，但他知道公司收購計劃的機密，並開始購買Pillsbury公司的看漲期權（又稱選擇權）與股票。 收購消息公開後，Pillsbury 的股價飆升， James O’Hagan因此大賺一筆。
- tender offer：收購要約
- acquire：取得、購得
- takeover：收購（公司）
- stock call options：選擇權、期權
- surge：飆漲
The Misappropriation Theory Deals with “Outsiders”
The misappropriation theory is designed to protect the integrity of the securities markets against abuses by ‘outsiders’ to a corporation who have access to confidential information that will affect the corporation’s security price when revealed, but who owe no fiduciary or other duty to that corporation’s shareholders.
這裡法院直接點出私取理論主要是在對付那些有管道取得足以影響公司股價的重大機密消息但又不對該公司股東負受託義務或其他信賴義務的公司“外部人”，防止他們濫用權利，以保護證券市場的完整性。
- misappropriation theory：私取理論
- integrity：完整性
- abuse：濫用
- reveal：公開、揭露
- fiduciary：受託的
Misappropriation is a Fraud to The Source of The Information
The “misappropriation theory” holds that a person commits fraud in connection with the purchase or sale of securities, and thereby violates § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5, when he misappropriates confidential information for securities trading purposes, in breach of a duty owed to the source of the information.
法院認為當一個人意圖為自己在證券市場上獲利而違反對消息來源的義務盜取機密消息，將會構成證券交易上的“詐欺行為”而違反證券交易法10(b)以及證券交易規則10b-5之規定。
- fraud：詐欺
- breach of a duty：違反義務
- owed to：歸因於
- source of the information：消息來源
Under this theory, a fiduciary who pretends loyalty to the principal while secretly converting the principal’s information for personal gain dupes or defrauds the principal. A company’s confidential information qualifies as property subject to exclusive use; the undisclosed misappropriation of such information constitutes fraud akin to embezzlement –the fraudulent appropriation to one’s own use of the money or goods entrusted to one’s care by another.
在私取理論下，行為人假裝對消息來源忠誠，卻同時在背地裡利用消息來源的消息謀取個人利益，這是對消息來源的愚弄與欺騙。而公司的機密消息是專屬於公司的財產， 未公開地盜用此類消息將構成類似於侵佔的欺詐行為，也就是欺詐性地將他人委託保管的財物佔為己有。
本文覺得這裡滿牽強的，侵佔是侵佔、詐欺是詐欺，兩個就是不一樣，而且也背離了信賴關係理論對「交易相對人」負擔義務的本質。
- pretend：假裝
- loyalty：忠誠
- principal：這裡指消息來源（人）
- convert：轉換、轉變
- dupe：誘騙、愚弄
- defraud：詐騙
- exclusive use：排他性使用
- akin to：類似
- embezzlement：侵佔
Classical theory and misappropriation theory
The two theories are complementary, each addressing efforts to capitalize on nonpublic information through the purchase or sale of securities. The classical theory targets a corporate insider’s breach of duty to shareholders with whom the insider transacts; the misappropriation theory outlaws trading on the basis of nonpublic information by a corporate “outsider” in breach of a duty owed not to a trading party, but to the source of the information.
最後法院認為信賴關係理論與私取理論是互補的，他們都是在解決利用未公開消息為證券交易的行為。信賴關係理論處理的是公司內部人作為交易相對人違反對股東的信賴義務而為交易的行為；而私取理論則是禁止外部人基於未公開的消息進行交易，這時候外部人違反的並不是對交易相對人的信賴義務，而是對消息來源的信賴義務。
- complementary：互補的
- capitalize on：利用…獲利
- outlaws：禁止
Conclusion
The Court held that O’Hagan could be found liable under Rule 10(b) for misappropriating confidential information, and subsequently remanded the case to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit for further legal proceedings.
法院認為O’Hagan將為其盜取機密消息的行為負證券交易法（The Security Exchange Act）第10條b項的責任，因此法院將該案發回美國第八巡迴上訴法院再為審理。
與消息傳遞理論不同的是，私取理論雖然也強調信賴關係，但本質上已經不是原本信賴關係理論所要求的交易相對人義務，所以並不屬於信賴關係理論的補充或延伸，而是全新的歸責理論。
但無論是消息傳遞理論或是私取理論其實都已經偏離了信賴關係理論的初衷，而感覺好像又回到最初的起點～資訊平等理論。禁止內線交易的目的是在保護市場本身的健全還是人與人之間的信賴呢？What is your opinion?
