本文以证券信息犯罪中的问题为研究对象，主要针对立法中存在的问题以及司法实践中的疑难问题展开研究。 立法中存在的问题主要包括：第一，证券信息犯罪立法滞后，我国证券信息犯罪采用刑法典的立法模式，不能适应快速发展的证券市场和不断变化的犯罪形势，《刑法》与《证券法》的相关规定不协调，包括：部分犯罪在立法时出现超前问题，部分构成要素的规定不协调，证券信息犯罪种类规定不协调，违反了对法定犯的惩治规则。因此，应当采用刑法典与附属刑法相结合的立法模式，提升立法对证券市场发展的反应能力。第二，证券信息犯罪罪名体系设置不合理。应当取消编造并传播证券交易虚假信息罪，由操纵证券市场罪对相关行为进行规制，取消利用非公开信息交易罪，相关行为纳入内幕交易罪的规制范围。第三，证券信息犯罪的罪状设置不合理。《刑法》第180条对内幕信息采用了空白罪状的立法方式，导致内幕信息的规定存在诸多问题。因此，应当确立内幕信息的必备要素包括重大性和未公开性，将准确性纳入重大性的考量中进行认定，并排除对相关性的要求。第四，证券信息犯罪刑罚配置不合理，应当完善罚金刑制度和“从业禁止”制度。 从已经裁判的证券信息犯罪案件来看，这类犯罪司法认定中的疑难问题主要包括：第一，内幕信息的公开性的认定。应当采用形式公开与实质公开相结合的标准，设置合理的等待期。第二，内幕信息准确性的认定。本文认为准确性不应当成为内幕信息的一项独立构成要素，而应当纳入重大性的认定。第三，内幕信息敏感期的判断。本文认为应当根据不同类型的内幕信息，采用不同的评判标准对内幕信息敏感期进行刑事认定；第四，司法实践中对国家公职人员，财经媒体从业人员，正当获取内幕信息的其他人员，以及经过多手传递信息的内幕信息接收人等是否属于证券内幕交易主体存在争议。应当以“信息平等理论”作为理论基础，将所有实际知悉内幕信息的人都纳入内幕交易主体范围；第五，不同审判机关对于“利用要件”是否属于内幕交易行为要件存在不同认识，本文认为利用内幕信息不应当成为内幕交易行为的构成要素；第六，对于内幕交易行为中个人行为和单位行为的区分，要综合考虑行为人的身份，是否以单位名义实施，违法所得是否归单位所有等多重因素；第七，对于泄露内幕信息及明示、暗示他人实施内幕交易的行为，司法实践中一般要求信息受领人实施证券交易行为；行为人如果向他人泄露内幕信息并明示或暗示他人买卖该证券，应当认定为后一个行为吸收了前一个行为。第八，对于利用信息优势的连续买卖和联合买卖操纵证券市场的行为，应正确认定利用信息优势操纵证券市场和操纵证券交易价格或交易量。第九，对于抢帽子交易型市场操纵行为，应当将犯罪主体扩大至逾投资者之间具有利益冲突，同时具有一定市场影响力的信息发布者。同时，应当正确认定公开发布信息行为与证券交易行为。在判断行为人公开发布信息与证券交易价格或交易量变动之间的因果关系时，应当适用因果关系推定原则。 具体来说：全文共分六章：证券信息犯罪基础论，证券内幕信息认定中的疑难问题，证券内幕交易主体认定中的疑难问题，证券类内幕交易、泄露内幕信息罪危害行为的认定，与证券信息相关的市场操纵行为的认定，证券信息犯罪的立法完善。 第一章，证券信息犯罪基础论。第一节对证券信息从广义和狭义上进行了定义，以证券信息的内容、发布主体、发布渠道作为标准对证券信息进行了分类，并详细阐述了证券信息在证券市场中的核心地位。随后，梳理了美国、欧盟、英国、德国、日本、中国等世界主要资本市场的证券犯罪立法，对我国刑法学界对证券犯罪存在的五种观点进行了分析对比，认为证券犯罪的定义应以“狭义说”为宜，即应将证券犯罪的定义设置为发生在证券交易、发行活动中，直接侵害证券市场管理秩序，损害投资者合法权益的犯罪。证券信息犯罪的范围应当限定在证券交易活动中，围绕证券信息实施的直接侵害证券市场管理秩序，损害投资者合法权益的犯罪，主要包括内幕交易、泄露内幕信息罪等6个罪名，并据此总结并分析了证券信息犯罪呈现出的四大特点。第二节提出了证券信息犯罪的理论基础是有效市场理论、市场信息平等理论以及信息不对称理论，并分析了这三个理论基础对证券信息犯罪的影响。第三节对我国立法及司法实践中证券信息犯罪的疑难问题进行聚焦，指出我国立法中存在的问题，梳理了94个已裁判刑事案例，总结出这些案例呈现的特点，并统计汇总出司法实践中证券内幕信息、证券内幕交易主体、证券内幕交易行为，以及与证券信息相关的市场操纵行为等的疑难问题。 第二章，证券内幕信息的认定。内幕信息是内幕交易、泄露内幕信息罪的首要必备条件，如何界定内幕信息是关键。IOSCO编写的《内幕交易-如何规制它》报告在对41个成员国内幕交易法律规定进行汇总后得出结论，内幕信息的界定具有两个要件：秘密性和重大性。在此基础上，本章第一节介绍了美国、欧盟、英国、德国、日本和我国等对内幕信息的界定，梳理了我国理论界的相关观点，指出我国关于内幕信息的立法规定中存在的问题。第二节是内幕信息重大性认定中的疑难问题。针对《证券法》第75条规定存在的问题展开研究，确立了重大性是内幕信息的必备要件。对于内幕信息重大性的认定标准问题，建议应当在价格敏感性标准的基础上增加理性投资者的考量因素，适当扩大内幕信息的范围。对于司法实践中内幕信息敏感期，尤其是内幕信息形成时间的认定问题，本文建议针对不同类型内幕信息形成时间，采用不同的评判标准对内幕信息敏感期进行刑事认定。第三节是内幕信息未公开性中的疑难问题。分析了我国现行立法规定关于内幕信息的公开标准所存在的问题，并指出因此而导致司法实践中对内幕信息的公开所存在的诸多争议，建议我国应采用形式公开与实质公开相结合的标准，设置合理的等待期。第四节分析了内幕信息相关性、准确性中的疑难问题。建议我国证券内幕信息应当排除“相关性”的要求，将准确性纳入重大性的认定中进行考虑。 第三章，证券内幕交易主体的认定。本章首先论述了当前世界范围内内幕交易主体的理论基础主要以美国采用的信赖关系理论和欧盟采用的信息平等理论作为主导，在此基础上，不同国家和地区采用的立法标准也有所不同。随后对我国各层级法律、法规和其他规范性文件进行梳理，指出我国关于内幕交易主体的规定中存在的问题：上下位法用语、主体范围不一致；证券内幕信息知情人员范围狭窄；对“非法获取”的规定较为狭窄；部分应当纳入内幕交易主体范围的人员被遗漏。在对67个内幕交易案件进行分析的基础上，本章对内幕交易主体在司法实践中的难点问题进行了梳理研究，主要包括：国家公职人员、财经媒体从业人员等是否属于证券内幕信息知情人员问题；非证券内幕交易主体正当获取内幕信息如何认定问题；经过多次传递的内幕信息接收人的认定问题等。针对上述问题，本文建议我国应当以“信息平等理论”作为理论基础对证券内幕交易主体进行立法修正，将内幕交易主体的用语统一采用“知悉证券内幕信息的人”，并将内幕交易主体扩大至任何实际知悉内幕信息的人，将内幕交易主体划分为直接知情人和间接知情人两种类型分别予以规制。 第四章，证券类内幕交易、泄露内幕信息罪危害行为的认定。IOSCO编写的《内幕交易-如何规制它》报告认为，判断交易者的交易行为是否属于内幕交易时，关键问题之一是确定该行为人是否有意识地利用内幕信息进行交易，当前各国立法禁止的内幕交易行为通常有两种：禁止内幕人买卖相关证券和禁止内幕信息传递行为，一些国家还禁止不正当利用内幕信息的其他行为。本章列举了美国、欧盟、德国、英国、日本以及我国立法禁止的内幕交易行为。本章立足于已裁判的内幕交易案例，对我国证券内幕交易行为的主要疑难问题，包括“利用内幕信息”是否应作为行为要件；如何认定内幕交易中的个人行为和单位行为；以及泄露内幕信息与明示、暗示他人实施内幕交易行为的认定难题等展开研究。 第五章，与证券信息相关的市场操纵行为的认定。首先介绍了理论界关于操纵证券市场犯罪的经典分类，主要分为行为型操纵、交易型操纵和信息型操纵三种。随后列举了IOSCO在《市场操纵的调查与起诉》报告对各成员国市场操纵行为类型的九种类型，并对美国、欧盟、英国、德国、日本以及我国等国家和地区立法规定的市场操纵行为类型进行了介绍。在此基础上，本文将与证券信息相关的市场操纵行为类型限定为：利用信息优势的连续买卖行为，利用信息优势的联合买卖行为以及信息型操纵行为。就利用信息优势的连续买卖行为和联合买卖行为操纵，本章结合已有的2起刑事案件，分析了司法实践中如何认定“利用信息优势”，以及对于“操纵证券交易价格或交易量”的理解。就蛊惑交易型市场操纵行为，迄今我国尚未出现此类案例。主要对蛊惑交易操纵与一般概念炒作的区别，以及蛊惑交易型操纵证券市场罪与编造并传播证券交易虚假信息罪的区别进行了论述研究。就“抢帽子交易”型市场操纵行为，因《刑法》仍未将其明确规定为犯罪，本章在理论界与实务界已有研究的基础上，就“抢帽子”交易行为进一步展开定性分析。结合已经裁判的5起“抢帽子交易”型案件，对此类案件的主体要素、行为要素的界定问题展开研究，并就如何判断行为人公开发布信息与证券交易价格或交易量变动之间存在因果关系提出相应判断标准。 第六章，证券信息犯罪的立法完善。从证券信息犯罪整体角度提出相应的立法完善建议，认为应当遵循刑法谦抑原则，效益原则和信息风险控制原则；重点关注市场信息优势者，并提升证券信息犯罪立法对证券市场发展的反应能力。就证券信息犯罪刑事立法的完善而言，应当完善证券犯罪的立法模式，采用刑法典与附属刑法相结合的立法模式，合理设定证券信息犯罪圈：取消编造并传播证券交易虚假信息罪，相关行为纳入操纵证券市场罪中予以规制；取消利用非公开信息交易罪，将相关行为作为内幕交易罪的一种行为方式予以规制。就证券信息犯罪的刑罚配置及非刑罚处罚措施的完善而言，应进一步完善罚金刑的适用，将罚金刑上升为主刑，并确保罚金刑能得到有效执行，明确罚金刑的适用标准，对单位犯罪中直接负责的主管人员和其他直接责任人员设置罚金刑。进一步完善证券信息犯罪“从业禁止”制度，扩大从业禁止的适用范围，并设置复权制度。 本文的创新之处在于：(1)选题比较新颖。证券市场本质上是信息市场。信息在证券市场中处于枢纽和核心地位。相较于政治经济学、金融学领域对证券市场以及证券信息等问题的深入研究，刑法领域以证券信息作为研究对象的论文较少，理论基础较为薄弱。本文作为证券信息犯罪的第一篇博士论文，选题较新颖。(2)论文采用实证研究法。资本市场已经形成判例的证券信息犯罪案件以及与证券信息犯罪案件紧密关联的金融市场重大事件，是研究证券信息犯罪最为重要的资料。本文通过不同视角对证券信息犯罪刑事判例及关联实例进行背景探究、历史审视、特征归纳、信息挖掘、情况分析、法律适用解析等实证分析，对发生于中国资本市场不同经济与金融发展时期的证券信息犯罪实质、行为特征、逻辑规律等问题进行整合，反思与检讨以刑法规范为中心的证券信息犯罪法律监管系统，为制度改良提供实证研究基础。(3)论文采用案例分析法。本文深入分析中国资本市场的相关证券信息犯罪判例，并以个案深度解析资本市场发生的重大案件，进而揭示证券信息犯罪的发展历史与最新动向。(4)论文综合运用刑法学、证券法学、经济学、组织行为学、金融学、信息学等多学科知识，以证券市场为基础、金融理论为起点，通过对证券市场，证券信息，内幕交易、泄露内幕信息行为，操纵证券市场行为等本质问题进行解构，对证券信息犯罪真实状况的把握和研究，构建证券信息犯罪的法律适用规则，并提出相应立法完善建议。 关键词：证券信息犯罪，证券内幕信息，证券内幕交易主体，证券内幕交易行为，与证券信息相关的市场操纵行为

 This paper takes the problems in the crime of securities information as the research object and mainly focuses on the problems in the legislation and the judicial practice. The problems in the legislation mainly include: First, the securities information crime legislation lags behind, securities information crime adopts the criminal code legislation model in China, can not adapt to the rapid development of the securities market and the changing crime situation, The relevant provisions of “Criminal Law” and “Securities Law” are not coordinated, including: some crimes have advanced problems in legislation, some of the constituent elements are not coordinated, and the types of securities information crimes are not coordinated, violating the punishment rules for statutory offenders. Therefore, the legislative model combining criminal code and subsidiary criminal law should be adopted to enhance the ability of legislation to respond to the development of the securities market. Second, the criminal information crime system is unreasonable. The crime of fabricating and disseminating false information in securities trading should be abolished. The crime of manipulating the securities market should be regulated, the crime of non-public information trading should be abolished, and the relevant behavior should be included in the regulation of insider trading crimes. Third, the criminality of securities information crimes is unreasonable. Article 180 of the Criminal Law adopts a blank criminal law for insider information, which leads to many problems in the regulation of insider information. Therefore, the necessary elements of inside information should be established, including materiality and undisclosedness, and the accuracy should be included in the consideration of the major considerations, and the requirements for relevance should be excluded. Fourth, the criminal punishment of securities information crimes is unreasonable, and the penalty system and the “prohibition of employment” system should be improved. From the criminal information crime cases that have been judged, the difficult problems in the judicial determination of such crimes mainly include: First, the openness identification of inside information. A reasonable combination of formal and substantive disclosure should be used to set a reasonable waiting period. Second, the identification of the accuracy of inside information. This paper argues that accuracy should not be an independent component of insider information, but should be included in the identification of materiality. Third, the judgment of the inside information sensitive period. This paper believes that different types of insider information should be used to criminalize the sensitive period of inside information. Fourth, in the judicial practice, whether the national public officials, financial media practitioners, other personnel who get inside information properly, and the insider information recipients who pass the information with many times or not, are subject to disputes over the insider trading body of the securities. The “information equality theory” should be taken as the theoretical basis, and all those who actually know the inside information should be included in the scope of insider trading. Fifth, different judicial authorities have different understandings about whether the “utilization requirements” belong to the insider trading behavior requirements. Insider information should not be a component of insider trading behavior. Sixth, for the distinction between individual behavior and unit behavior in insider trading behavior, it is necessary to comprehensively consider the identity of the perpetrator, whether it is implemented in the name of the unit, and whether the illegal income is owned by the unit. Seventh, for the disclosure of insider information and express or implied the conduct of insider trading by others, judicial practice generally requires the information subject to conduct securities trading; if the actor reveals inside information to others and express or imply that others buy or sell the securities It should be considered that the latter act absorbed the previous act. Eighth, for the use of information superiority of continuous trading and joint trading to manipulate the securities market, it should be correctly identified that the use of information superiority to manipulate the securities market and manipulate the price or volume of securities transactions. Ninth, for the manipulation of the hat-traded market, the criminal subject should be expanded to more than the information publishers who have conflicts of interest between investors and have certain market influence. At the same time, the behavior of publicly publishing information and securities trading should be correctly identified. The principle of causality presumption should be applied when judging the causal relationship between the public release of information and the change in the price or trading volume of the stock. This paper is divided into six chapters: basic theory of securities information crime, study on the problems of securities insider information, research on the problems of subjects of securities insider trading, research on the problems of securities insider trading behavior, research on the problems of market manipulation behavior related to securities information, and improvement of securities information crime legislation. Chapter one: basic theory of securities information crime. The first section defines securities information in a broad sense and in a narrow sense. The securities information is classified according to the content, issuing subject and issuing channel of securities information, and the core position of the securities information in the securities market is elaborated. Subsequently, it sorts out the securities crime legislation of the world's major capital markets, such as the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, China, etc., and analyzes and contrasts the five viewpoints of securities crimes in China′s criminal law community. It believes that the definition of securities crime should be in a narrow sense, it is appropriate to set the definition of securities crime as a crime that occurs in securities trading and issuance activities, directly infringes on the management order of the securities market, and damages the legitimate rights and interests of investors. The scope of securities information crime should be limited in securities trading activities, the crimes directly affect the securities market management order and damage the legitimate rights and interests of investors, including the crimes of insider trading and disclosure of inside information, and another six crimes. It summarizes and analyzes the four characteristics of securities information crime. The second section puts forward that the theoretical basis of securities information crime is efficient market theory, market information equality theory and asymmetry information theory, and analyzes the influence of these three theoretical foundations on securities information crime. The third section focuses on the difficult problems of securities information crime in China’s legislation and judicial practice, points out the problems in China′s legislation, sorts out 94 criminal cases that have been judged, summarizes the characteristics of these cases, and summarizes the problems of judicial practice, such as securities insider information, securities insider trading in the judicial practice subject, securities insider trading behavior, as well as related to securities information market manipulation and other problems. Chapter two: research on the problems of securities insider information. Insider information is the first necessary condition of the crimes of insider trading and disclosure of inside information, it is the key about how to define insider information. After summarizing the legal provisions of insider trading in 41 members, the report “Insider Trading: How Jurisdictions Regulate It” prepared by IOSCO concluded that the definition of insider information has two elements: confidentiality and materiality. On this basis, the first section of this chapter introduces the definition of insider information in the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan and China, sorts out the relevant viewpoints of the theoretical circles in China, and points out the problems in China’s legislative provisions on insider information. The second section is the problem in the materiality determination of inside information. This paper studies the problems in article 75 of Securities Law, and establishes that materiality is a necessary condition for insider information. As for the determination standard of the significance of insider information, it is suggested that reasonable investor elements should consider more factors on the basis of price sensitivity standard, and the scope of insider information should be appropriately expanded. As for the identification of the sensitive period of insider information in judicial practice, especially the formation time of insider information, this paper suggests that the criminal identification of the sensitive period of insider information should be carried out according to different types of insider information formation time and different evaluation criteria. The third section is the problem in the undisclosed of insider information. This paper analyzes the problems existing in the standards for the disclosure of inside information stipulated in China′s current legislation, and points out that there are many disputes about the disclosure of inside information in judicial practice. The fourth section analyzes the problems in the relevance and accuracy of inside information. It is suggested that the inside information of securities in China should exclude the requirement of “relevance” and take the accuracy into the identification of materiality for consideration. Chapter three: research on the subject of insider trading. This chapter firstly discusses that the theoretical basis of insider trading subjects in the world, mainly based on the trust relationship theory adopted by the United States and the information equality theory adopted by the European Union. On this basis, the legislative standards adopted by different countries and regions are also different. Subsequently, it sorts out the laws, regulations and other normative documents of various levels in China, and points out the problems in China’s provisions on the subject of insider trading: the upper and lower legal terms and the scope of the subject are inconsistent; the insider of securities inside information is narrow; The provisions on “illegal acquisition” are relatively narrow; Some personnel that should be included in the scope of insider trading subjects are omitted. On the basis of the analysis of 67 cases of insider trading, this chapter has sorted out and studied the difficult problems in the judicial practice, including: whether national public officials, financial media practitioners, etc. are involved in the insider information of securities; How to identify the subject of non-securities insider trading who properly obtains insider information; The identification of the tippee of inside information that has been tipped for many times. According to the above problem, this article suggest that China should take “information equality theory” as the main theoretical basis to carry out legislative amendments to the insider trading of securities, unifying the insider trading main body language as “people who know the inside information of securities and futures”, Expand to any person who actually knows inside information, and divide the insider trading entity into two types: direct insider and indirect insider. Chapter four: Research on the problems of insider trading. According to the report “Insider Trading: How Jurisdictions Regulate It” prepared by IOSCO, one of the key issues in determining whether a trader’s trading behavior is insider trading or not is to determine whether the perpetrator consciously uses insider information for trading or not, the current national legislation usually prohibits two kinds of insider trading behaviors: prohibiting insider buying and selling related securities and prohibiting insider information transmission, some countries also prohibit other acts that improperly use insider information. This chapter lists insider trading prohibited by laws in the United States, the European Union, Germany, the United Kingdom, Japan and China. Based on the cases of insider trading that have been judged, this chapter discusses the main problems of insider trading in China’s securities, including whether the “use of insider information” should be regarded as an element of conduct; how to identify individual and unit behaviors in insider trading; As well as the disclosure of insider information and express, hint that others carry out insider trading behavior identification problems and so on. Chapter five: Research on the problem of market manipulation related to securities information. Firstly, this paper introduces the classical classification of the crime of manipulating securities market, which is divided into three types: behavior manipulation, transaction manipulation and information manipulation. Subsequently, nine types of market manipulation behaviors of members were listed in IOSCO report investigation and prosecution of market manipulation, and the types of market manipulation behaviors stipulated in the legislation of the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, China and other countries and regions were introduced. On this basis, this paper defines the types of market manipulation behavior related to securities information as: continuous buying and selling behavior using information superiority, joint buying and selling behavior using information superiority, and information manipulation behavior. This chapter analyzes how to determine “using information superiority” in judicial practice and how to understand “manipulating the price or volume of securities trading” in combination with two criminal cases. So far, China has not any cases in the market manipulation behavior of demagogic transaction. This paper discusses and studies the difference between the crime of manipulating securities market and the crime of fabricating and spreading false information. As for the market manipulation behavior of “hat snatching”, since it has not been clearly defined as a crime in the criminal law, this chapter further conducts a qualitative analysis on the behavior of “hat snatching” on the basis of existing studies in the theoretical and practical circles. Combined with the five cases of “hat snatching” that have been judged, this paper studies the definition of the subject elements and behavior elements of such cases, and puts forward the corresponding judgment criteria on how to judge the causal relationship between the public release of information by the actor and the change of securities trading price or trading volume. Chapter six is the legislative perfection of securities information crime. This paper puts forward corresponding legislative improvement suggestions. It is believed that the principles of criminal law modesty, the principles of efficiency and information risk control should be followed. The focus should be on the market information superiority, and the ability of securities information crime legislation to respond to the development of the securities market should be improved. As far as the criminal legislation of securities information crime is perfected, it is necessary to improve the legislative mode of securities crime, adopt the legislative mode combining criminal code and affiliated criminal law, and reasonably set the circle of securities information crime: the crime of fabricating and spreading false information in securities trading is abolished, and related behaviors are included in the crime of manipulating securities market for regulation; The crime of trading with non-public information should be abolished, and the related behaviors should be regulated as one of the behaviors of the crime of insider trading. As far as the penalty arrangement of securities information crimes is concerned, it is necessary to further improve the application of fine penalty, elevate the fine penalty to the principal penalty, ensure the effective execution of fine penalty, clarify the applicable standard of fine penalty, and set fine penalty for the person in charge who is directly responsible and other personnel who are directly responsible in unit crime. We will further improve the “prohibition of employment” system for securities information crimes, expand the scope of application for prohibition of employment, and set up a system for reinstatement. The innovations of this paper are: (1) The topic is relatively new. The securities market is essentially an information market. Information is at the core position in the securities market. Compared with the in-depth study of securities market and securities information in the fields of political economy and finance, there are few papers in the field of criminal law with securities information as the research object, and the theoretical basis is weak. As the first doctoral thesis of securities information crime, this paper is quite novel. (2) The paper uses empirical research. The capital market has formed a precedent for securities information crime cases and major financial market events closely related to securities information crime cases, and is the most important material for studying securities information crimes. This paper analyzes the criminal precedents and related examples of securities information crime through different perspectives, including background research, historical review, feature induction, information mining, situation analysis, legal application analysis, etc. The integration of information crime essence, behavior characteristics, logic law and other issues that occur in different periods of economic and financial development in China′s capital market, reflection and review of the legal system of securities information crime centered on criminal law norms, providing an empirical research basis for institutional improvement. (3) The paper uses case analysis. This paper deeply analyzes the relevant securities information crimes in China′s capital market, and analyzes the major cases in the capital market and reveals the development history and latest trends of securities information crime. (4) The paper comprehensively uses multidisciplinary knowledge such as criminal law, securities law, economics, organizational behavior, finance, informatics, etc., based on the securities market and financial theory as the starting point, through the securities market, securities information, insider trading The disclosure of internal information behaviors, manipulation of securities market behaviors and other essential issues for deconstruction, the grasp and research of the real situation of securities information crimes, the construction of legal rules for securities information crimes, and the corresponding legislative improvement recommendations. Key words: Securities information crime, insider information, securities insider dealing subject, securities insider trading behavior, Market manipulation related to securities information