388 KB70 KB201320252014Samec Berghaus, Natašaletnik:40številka:5str. 742-763ISSN:0353-6521COBISSID:4742955URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-OP55LVMHslIUS SOFTWAREPodjetje in delofinančni instrumentinotranje informacijepodjetjazlorabaAnaliza elementov insiderskega posla|The prohibited insider dealing causes harm to the economy with reducing confidence in the regulated markets. It is difficult to recognize it, prove it, and, accordingly, to sanction it. Not even a single conviction for the criminal offense of misuse of inside information is available in publicly accessible databases of judicial decisions in Slovenia since its independence. Insider dealing is regulated with the two-tier regulation, as along as the sectorial legislation (Financial Instruments Market Act - ZTFI) and also Criminal Code (KZ-1) provides sanctions for insider dealing. The definition of criminal offense of misuse of inside information is narrower in the Criminal Code than in the ZTFI's provision prohibiting insider dealing. However, Article 238 of KZ-1 should be applied in conjunction with the provisions on insider dealing in ZTFI, although it is not a blanket norm. KZ-1 does not define three objective elements of the criminal offense of misuse of inside information - among them also the central element, i.e. "inside information" - and it in general inadequately defines insider dealing. The elements of inside information (accuracy, public nature, important influence on financial instruments pricing) and the issue of its use are the most complex questions in determining the violation of insider dealing. Thus, the author pays special attention to them in this article, as he analyses the facts that should be known: to the subject to whom the prohibition of insider dealing is directed to, to the offence authority (ATVP), to the law enforcement authority, collecting evidence and writing the charge, and to the judge when determining decisive factsPrepovedan insiderski posel povzroča škodo gospodarstvu, ker zmanjšuje zaupanje na organiziranem trgu. Problem ga je prepoznati, dokazati in posledično sankcionirati. V Sloveniji od osamosvojitve do danes v javno dostopnih bazah sodnih odločb ni zabeležena niti ena obsodilna sodba zaradi storitve kaznivega dejanja zlorabe notranje informacije. Ureditev insiderskih poslov je dvotirna, ker poleg matičnega zakona (zakon o trgu finančnih instrumentov - ZTFI) tudi kazenski zakonik (KZ-1) sankcionira insiderski posel, vendar pa kaznivo dejanje zlorabe notranje informacije opredeljuje drugače (ožje), kot je določena prepoved trgovanja na podlagi notranjih informacij v ZTFI. Vendar določbe 238. člena KZ-1 ni mogoče uporabiti brez določb ZTFI o insiderstvu, čeprav njena dispozicija ni blanketna. KZ-1 ne opredeljuje treh objektivnih znakov kaznivega dejanja zlorabe notranje informacije - med drugim tudi ne osrednjega znaka: to je "notranja informacija" - in sploh pomanjkljivo normira insiderski posel. Prav elementi notranje informacije (natančnost, javnost, pomemben vpliv na ceno finančnih instrumentov) in vprašanje njene uporabe so pri ugotavljanju kršitev insiderskih poslov najbolj kompeksni in jim v tem prispevku posvečam osrednjo pozornost. Gre za analizo dejstev, ki jih morajo poznati: subjekt, na katerega se prepoved insiderstva nanaša, prekrškovni organ (ATVP), organ pregona, ki zbira dokaze in piše obtožni predlog (oziroma obtožnico), in sodnik, ko ugotavlja odločilna dejstvaTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia