本文以葉錦徽，林怡諄，與朱珊瑩(2015)的觀點延伸，嘗試回顧1990年至2010年之間以違反證交法155條業經一或二審裁定股票操縱的案例公司為研究樣本，揭露國內相關判決中所顯示法官對相關法條認定的歧異性: 相同事實可有相反判決、每個庭判決的不一樣、審級間經常大逆轉。專業審理判決的一致性對台灣的司法正義與司法之社會教育有重要的意義，而本文所呈現的方法為這個方向提供了一個可能性的初探。對金融或經濟犯罪的案件，本文雜揉專業的財經理論學理，並適當地搭配可以反映事實的資料導向計量分析，做為基礎論證案件。本文的方法可以便利地編制、重製與觀察個股股價，並定期發布做為偵測股價操縱的預警模式。此預警模式不但可以防範有心人的操弄、提升交易訊息透明度與降低資訊不對稱、保護資訊相對弱勢的股民，還可以讓法院與檢調體系對金融、經濟犯罪的審理、量刑多了一項科學工具。如此程序除了可形成對事實與法條認定一致的標準，也可凝聚司法判決實務運作的共識！

Using the court-sentenced cases dealing with violations of the Anti-Manipulation Clause No. 155 in the Securities Exchange Act of the R.O.C. from 1990 to 2010 as our study sample, we find a variety of disagreement among the judgments, determinations and decisions of the courts at different levels. Such a vast difference of opinions among judges and the verdicts may lead to undesired controversies and disputes in society. It also brings up some implementation issues in the judicial and legal system. Our paper demonstrates that, with help from simple concepts from finance and modern econometrics tools, there is an objective data-driven fact-based approach to identify pump and dump manipulation. The proposed approach is easy to implement, hinges on stock prices only, and can be adaptively updated for ex post identification and ex ante early warning purposes. We believe such a scientific approach based on professional field knowledge has the potential to build up trust and fortify consensus among court judges and the public, thus strengthening the social capital of our society.