上市公司并购重组的刑事法律风险防控

上市公司进行的并购重组是指目标公司与并购公司之间针对企业控制权而进行的一种权利让渡行为。在上市公司进行并购重组的过程中，由于伴随着巨额的资本运作，往往会产生严峻的刑事法律风险。
01、资金募集
对于并购方来说，依靠自有资产完成收购往往力有不逮，因此并购公司往往采用“换股”、“股份换资产”的方式进行并购，其具体方式是通过发行新股、优先股、债券等证券及其组合作为对价收购目标公司的股权。
由于发行证券进行融资受到多重限制，一些公司为了达成募集资金完成并购重组的目的，往往采取在招股说明书、认股书、公司、企业债券募集办法中虚构交易业务、虚增资产、收入等手段来粉饰业绩满足要求，依据《刑法》第160条及相关司法解释，当欺诈发行的股票、债券数额在500万元以上，或具有伪造相关文件、票据等行为时，直接责任人将构成“欺诈发行股票、债券罪”。
如若并购公司虽未进行虚构交易、隐瞒债务等行为，但其未经过国务院证券管理部门批准擅自超额发行、溢价发行股票、公司债券的，依据相关司法解释及立案追诉标准，只要发行数额在50万元以上，或者向30人以上发行或不能及时清偿清退的，将构成“擅自发行股票、债券罪”。
上市公司单次发行股票、债券的数额通常远高于上述犯罪的数额标准，因此只要上市公司为了募集资金进行并购，实施了造假、粉饰业绩等欺诈行为或者违反相关证券发行程序，就极有可能构成犯罪。对于有并购重组意向的上市公司在募集资金时必须严格遵守法定程序。
02、内幕信息
在并购重组的磋商中产生的增资扩股、公司收购方案等内幕信息，对公司股价会产生较大影响，掌握内幕信息的人员若利用信息优势套利，将严重干扰金融管理秩序。
并购公司在与目标公司就并购重组事项进行谈判磋商时，双方的董事、监事、经理层以及其他内幕信息知情人，如若不注意内幕信息的保密，或者故意利用这些信息获利，极有可能触犯刑责，具体表现在两个方面：
一是内幕信息被恶意传播。如在上市公司进行并购重组过程中，相关人员将双方将要进行并购的消息等内容向他人泄露，使他人利用该信息进行证券买卖操作，只要情节严重（如证券交易成交额累计在50万元以上），将构成“泄露内幕信息罪”。若相关人员在知晓内幕信息后进行一定加工，编造并传播证券交易、期货交易虚假信息的，累计造成的损失或获利在5万元以上或造成交易量、交易价格异常波动的，还将构成“编造并传播证券、期货交易虚假信息罪”。
二是滥用信息优势地位。内幕信息知情人如若利用内幕信息直接买卖证券、期货或者根据内幕信息建议他人买卖证券、期货，情节严重的将构成“内幕交易罪”。
因此，当上市公司在与目标公司就并购重组问题进行磋商、谈判过程一定要注意对涉及并购方案、交易结构等具体信息进行严格的保密，并且在内幕信息尚未公布的敏感期内审慎的进行证券交易。
03、交易结构设计
并购重组的双方企业为完成一个企业的最终交割而对该企业在资产、财务、税务、人员、法律等方面进行重组，如果在交易结构的具体细节中存在设计不周，如对企业估值存在误差，错误估计交易风险，从而导致经济损失，并购重组双方的决策人，特别是国有企业的管理层往往面临“国有公司企业失职、滥用职权罪”、“徇私舞弊低价折股、出售国有资产罪”、“背信损害上市公司利益罪”的追诉风险。
据笔者观察，此种商事领域的渎职类刑事风险在国有上市公司并购中最为常见。在笔者曾经办理的一起案件中，司法机关认为某国有企业董事长由于在设计并购重组交易结构中存在疏漏，未进行相应的风险评估，造成重组企业破产注销，因此追究其刑事责任。
综上，在企业设立合规计划进行刑事合规审查已成为上市公司并购重组过程中的重中之重，企业在融资过程中要进行详尽的尽职调查，杜绝财务造假的行为；在进行具体的协商洽谈中，要注意对敏感信息和交易细节的保密和管理工作；在敲定并购重组的具体交易结构时应当进行详细的分析、论证、评估；在并购重组完成后，应当对重组企业进行严格的监管，从而防患于未然。通过设立合规计划进行刑事风险防控不仅仅是对企业的日常体检，更是降低日后面临刑事追诉概率的保险，即使日后企业与责任人员面临刑事追诉，有过在并购重组中进行刑事合规审查的环节也将有效降低定罪概率与量刑幅度，而唯有将刑事合规的精神内化于企业的日常经营，将功夫下在平时才有可能彻底远离刑事追诉风险。
原文登载于《商法》杂志2018年第2期（有删改）
Risks in acquisitions, restructurings by listed companies in China
The term “acquisition/restructuring” as carried out by a listed company means a rights assignment of corporate control carried out between a target company and an acquiring company. As acquisitions/restructurings carried out by listed companies are accompanied by massive capital operations, they will regularly give rise to serious criminal legal risks.
Raising funds. For the acquirer, relying on its own assets to complete the acquisition is usually not possible. Accordingly, the acquisition will be done by way of a “share swap”, or “share for asset swap”. Specifically, this will be accomplished by offering new shares, preference shares, bonds or other such securities, and using their combination as the consideration for the equity of the target company.
As there are multiple restrictions placed on financing through the offering of shares, certain companies, for the purpose of raising funds to complete an acquisition/restructuring, will often use such means as fabricating a transaction, fraudulently increasing assets or revenues, etc., in their prospectus, application for shares, company or enterprise bond offering measures, so as to embellish their performance results and satisfy requirements. Pursuant to article 160 of the Criminal Law and related judicial interpretations, when the proceeds of a fraudulent share or bond offering reach at least RMB5 million (US$793,000), or a fabrication of relevant documents, vouchers, etc., is involved, the person directly in charge will be guilty of the “crime of fraudulent offering of shares or bonds”.
If the acquirer has over-issued, or issued at a premium stocks or company bonds without the approval of the State Council’s securities regulator, then, pursuant to relevant judicial interpretations and the criteria for the opening and prosecution of cases, if the offering proceeds reach at least RMB500,000, or if the offering is made to 30 or more persons, or repayment cannot be promptly made, the “crime of unauthorized offering of shares or bonds” will be constituted.
The proceeds of a single offering of stocks or bonds by a listed company will usually far exceed the amount of proceeds required to constitute the above-mentioned crimes. So if a listed company, for the purposes of raising funds to carry out an acquisition, commits fraud, embellishes its results, or commits another such deceptive act, or breaches the relevant securities offering procedure, there is a strong possibility that a criminal offence will be constituted. Such listed company must stringently adhere to the statutory procedure when raising the funds.
Insider information. Insider information on a capital and share increase, company acquisition plan, etc., generated during negotiations for an acquisition/restructuring has a relatively major impact on a company’s share price, and if the directors, supervisors and management of the parties, and other persons in the know, fail to pay attention to maintaining the confidentiality of the insider information, or if the persons with access to such insider information exploit their information advantage to engage in arbitrage, there is a strong possibility that a crime will be constituted.
More specifically, this can be manifested in two ways. First, the insider information is transmitted in bad faith. If, in the course of an acquisition/restructuring being carried out by a listed company, a relevant person divulges information on the acquisition that the parties are proposing to carry out to a third party, allowing that third party to exploit such information to carry out securities manipulation, the “crime of divulging insider information” will be constituted if the circumstances are serious (e.g., if the securities transaction amount reaches at least RMB500,000 in the aggregate). If a relevant person modifies insider information after being privy to it, fabricating and transmitting false securities or futures trading information, and so causing a loss or reaping a gain of at least RMB50,000 in the aggregate, or causing an unusual fluctuation in trading volume or trading price, the same will constitute the “crime of fabricating and transmitting false securities or futures trading information”.
The second way is the abuse of advantageous information position. If a person with insider information exploits such information to directly trade securities or futures, or, based on such information, advises a third party to trade in the securities or futures, and the circumstances of this are serious, the “crime of insider trading” will be constituted.
Accordingly, a listed company must pay attention to keeping specific information relating to the acquisition plan, transaction structure, etc., strictly confidential, and prudently carry out securities trading during the sensitive period before the insider information is made public.
Design of transaction structure. If the two enterprises involved in an acquisition/restructuring need to carry out a restructuring of one of the enterprise’s assets, finances, tax matters, personnel, legal matters etc., to complete the final closing of the transaction, and there are some design flaws in the specific details of the transaction structure − e.g., a discrepancy in the valuation of the enterprise, or an erroneous assessment of the transaction risks, thereby resulting in an economic loss − the decision makers of the parties to the acquisition/restructuring, particularly the management of a state-owned enterprise, will often face the risk of prosecution for the “crime of dereliction of duty or abuse of authority in a state-owned company or enterprise”, or the “crime of committing irregularities by discounting shares or selling state-owned assets at a low price” or the “crime of breach of fiduciary duty causing harm to the interests of a listed company”.
The author finds that the risk of such malfeasance crimes in the commercial sector is seen most commonly in acquisitions by state-owned listed companies. In one case in which the author was involved, the judicial authority held that the chairman of the board of a certain state-owned enterprise had, due to omissions in the design of the acquisition/restructuring transaction structure and failure to carry out the relevant risk assessment, caused the restructured enterprise to go bankrupt and be deregistered, and, as a result, pursued his criminal liability.
In short, the prevention and control of criminal risks and compliance reviews has become important in the course of an acquisition/restructuring carried out by a listed company. In the course of the financing, the enterprise must carry out exhaustive due diligence and block any financial fraud.
In the course of the specific negotiations and discussions,setting up the compliance program has been more vital in the acquisition/restructuring of open company to avoid criminal risk.So, attention must be paid to the confidentiality and management of sensitive information, and the transaction details. When crafting the specific transaction structure for the acquisition/restructuring, detailed analyses, fact finding and assessment need to be carried out. Once the acquisition/restructuring has been completed, it is necessary to strictly oversee the restructured enterprise so as to guard against potential dangers.The prevention and control of criminal risk through the establishment of a compliance program is not only the daily physical examination of the enterprise, but also the insurance to reduce the probability of criminal prosecution in the future.Even if the enterprise and the responsibility person are confronted with criminal prosecution, the criminal compliance examination which was carried out once in the acquisition/restructuring will reduce the conviction probability and term of imprisonment.At last, only the spirit of criminal compliance is accepted by the enterprise, the criminal risk will be eliminated completely.
Original source: CBLJ Issue 2, 2018 (abridged version)