In recent years, administrative organs have increased punishment for violations of capital market transactions. The most typical punishment for enterprise insider trading, market manipulation and market disruption has been significantly expanded at the upper and lower limits, and the means of punishment have gradually moved away from simple fine punishment and adopted a variety of punishment methods. In order to achieve the ultimate goal of regulating the chaos of the capital market. This paper will combine cases to elaborate on the violation of market disruption, and further help enterprises to clarify the many risks under capital market transactions.

1. The definition of market disruption

Market disruption refers to: by fabricating or spreading false information, enterprises or individuals make the securities market, which is greatly driven by information, affected by the impact of various macro or micro level information on the psychological expectations of investment subjects, so as to achieve the purpose of affecting the trend of the entire securities market and make profits from it. The fundamental reason why such behavior will lead to market chaos is mainly concentrated on the high feedback of the securities market to the market information. The main body of the capital market is highly susceptible to the influence of all kinds of information, no matter whether the information is falsified or not. Considering the reality of China's capital market, the new Securities Law will make and pass on false information to the perpetrators. It is not difficult to understand that disturbing the securities market is listed as a major securities illegal act.

2. Common patterns of disruptive market behavior

According to Article 56 of the new Securities Law, the following acts can be identified as acts that disrupt the market:

(1) Enterprises and individuals fabricate or disseminate false or misleading information to disrupt the securities market.

(2) Securities trading venues, securities companies, securities registration and settlement organizations, securities service organizations and their employees, securities industry associations, securities regulatory bodies and their staff make false statements or misleading information in securities trading activities.

From the above provisions, it is not difficult to find that the behavior of disturbing the securities market mainly includes fabricating and spreading false information. For the judgment of spreading false information, it is often not necessary for the implementer to know that the transmitted information is false information. That is, even if the disseminator does not know that the information disseminated is false information, it may be deemed to be spreading false information. This judgment is based on the influence of the relevant communicators on the market. For public figures with official discourse power or strong influence on the market, or internal employees of the enterprises involved, and even the enterprises involved, they should take corresponding responsibilities for the information transmitted, and it is not appropriate to disseminate any information directly before it is confirmed to be true.

3. The consequences of market disruption

According to Article 193 of the new Securities Law, those who fabricate or disseminate false or misleading information and disturb the securities market shall have their illegal gains confiscated and be fined for an amount between one and ten times their illegal gains; If there are no illegal gains or the illegal gains are less than 200,000 yuan, a fine of not less than 200,000 yuan but not more than 2 million yuan shall be imposed.

Those who, in violation of the provisions of the second paragraph of Article 56 of this Law, make false statements or misleading information in securities trading activities shall be ordered to make corrections and be fined not less than 200,000 yuan but not more than two million yuan; If they are state workers, they shall also be given sanctions according to law.

Where the media and their staff engaged in securities market information reporting violate the provisions of paragraph 3 of Article 56 of this Law and engage in securities trading that conflicts with their work duties, their illegal gains shall be confiscated and a fine of less than the equivalent value of securities trading shall be imposed.

Compared with insider trading and market manipulation, the punishment target of market disruption is wider in scope, and its radiation scope may not only include the enterprises and employees involved in the securities involved, the securities market reporting agencies and their employees unrelated to the securities involved, and even the state staff can become the main body of punishment for market disruption. Therefore, it is necessary for enterprises to be cautious in the acquisition and transmission of securities information, so as to avoid being punished by administrative organs without knowing it.

[Typical case -- Wu Huazhang disrupting the market case]

On January 28, 2019, Chen Mou Heng fabricated "Bloomberg News, the new chairman of the Securities and Futures Commission, Yi Huiman, said at a press conference that in 2018, a large number of listed companies had a lot to do with the non-market-oriented regulatory system, and the main work in 2019 is to implement the short-selling mechanism and improve the delisting system." Let companies with fraudulent issuance and financial fraud have no place to hide, and encourage insurance funds and bank wealth management funds to invest in the stock market for a long time, and maintain the stability of the capital market "information, and from 23:23 on the same day, His wechat ID cyh********258 (wechat nickname "D**r") was published in 9 wechat groups such as "blackrock" and "Investment Circle". Since then, the false information has been forwarded and spread in multiple QQ groups and wechat groups.

After investigation, the above information is inconsistent with the objective facts: the Chairman of the CSRC Yi Huiman has not held any press conference since he took office on January 26, 2019 until Chen issued the false information. The above information is false.

On the morning of January 29, 2019, Wu Huazhang, news editor of Sina Financial Integrated Channel, repeatedly saw the false information involved in the wechat group, and again saw the false information involved in the Sina Weibo account "Analyst's Hundred years of loneliness". Without verifying the source and authenticity of the information, Wu used a colleague's work account at 09:41 on the same day, "according to Bloomberg, Yi Huiman, the new CSRC chairman, said at a press conference... The main work in 2019 is to implement the short selling mechanism "published in the bottom news library of the Sina.com finance channel. The news was immediately reprinted by a number of mainstream online media, and the number of readers rose rapidly.

At 09:51 on January 29, 2019, Sina Securities, a Sina Weibo account actually managed and operated by Sina Net Finance Channel, published false information involved in the case. Subsequently, the false information involved was widely spread by other online media and Sina Weibo accounts.

At 10:41 on January 29, 2019, the Sina Weibo account "Sina Securities" released a rumor. After the CSRC and the official securities media released the rumor-refuting information, the Sina.com financial channel also released the rumor-refuting news, and reproduced the rumor-refuting news released by the CSRC and other official channels.

After the widespread spread of the false information involved, the Shanghai and Shenzhen indices fell continuously from 09:56 to 10:25 on January 29, 2019, the Shanghai Composite Index fell by 1.3%, the Shenzhen Component Index fell by 1.83%, and the trading volume increased significantly. The market fell gradually after the Sina Weibo account "Sina Securities" posted at 10:41 "Bloomberg refutes rumors: No CSRC news".

【 CSRC Analysis 】

The CSRC believes that Wu Huazhang, as a media practitioner, did not review the sources and authenticity of the information released, and did not follow the principle that "practitioners should abide by the professional ethics of journalism, adhere to the principle of news authenticity, carefully verify the sources of news information, and reprint the news information released by units within the scope of national regulations." The practice of preventing the compilation and distribution of false Internet news information and ensuring that Internet news information is true, accurate, comprehensive and objective violated the provisions of Article 78, paragraph 1, of the Securities Law, which prohibits state personnel, media practitioners and relevant personnel from fabricating and spreading false information and disrupting the securities market.

【 Case Guide 】

The violation of disrupting the securities market is not limited to listed companies and their senior managers in terms of the scope of the subject of the violation. Any individuals and enterprises with certain influence involved in the dissemination of information in the securities market may be suspected of disrupting the securities market. In particular, it is necessary to pay attention to the media platforms with high influence, which need to do their homework on the information reported by them to prevent inaccurate information reporting and cause volatility in the securities market. In this case, the perpetrator, Wu Huazhang, a news editor for the Sina financial platform, publicly disseminated the information without verifying whether it was true, causing the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock indexes to fall. The decline was only moderated after the information was falsified. Wu Huazhang took the corresponding responsibility for his audit negligence. Through this case, it is necessary to remind that the violation of the docking of the capital market may not only face the main body of listed companies, but also for other enterprises related to the securities market, such as the media industry and the financial industry, there may be a situation of "momentary negligence is responsible".