臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

世界大型的投資銀行之一的法國興業銀行，在2008年初發生了弊案，因為內部控制不佳而發生了員工盜竊資產的舞弊案件，造成48.2億歐元的損失。國內近年來金融舞弊案也是層出不窮如中華商業銀行、萬泰銀行都發生掏空弊案。這些弊案一再突顯出內部控制存在的價值，內部控制已成為公司治理最重要的一環，本研究因此要探討國內商業銀行的內部控制與財務績效特色及舞弊發生的性質。
本研究首先以舞弊或內控缺失的銀行為樣本，透過財務報導的內部控制－較小型公開發行公司指引中的五大要素與二十項基本原則，來分析這類型銀行的舞弊及內部控制的特色。為了瞭解財務績效與內控缺失是否有相關性。本篇研究將銀行分類為有內控缺失及正常的銀行，以中央銀行對銀行的評等財務比率及相關的變數，來進行邏輯迴歸實證模型分析，以深入探討兩者的相關性。
研究結果發現舞弊或內控缺失的銀行，大多數是因為內部控制中的控制活動與監督要素失去的功效，才發生內部控制缺失；而嚴重的舞弊則是控制環境及風險評估要素喪失功能。本研究進一步選取四家商業銀行來分析，並對內部控制缺失的地方做建議與改善方法。透過實證模型發現內部控制缺失發生與銀行的財務、營運比率與具有相關性。以中央銀行評等制度來分析，缺失或是舞弊的銀行通常資產品質較差、獲利能力持續下滑或是虧損、業務衰退、財務結構較不健全等特色，而正常的銀行則不會有這些現象。

Societe Generale is one of the large-scale investment banks which occurs a heavy fraudulence at the beginning of 2008. Because of material weakness in internal control, Societe Generale has a €4.82 billion loss of misappropriation of asset. As a result, the effectiveness of internal control became a popular issue in the business field. In Taiwan, there are also some frauds like the Chinese Bank and Cosmos Bank. These cases perennially appear value of internal control, and internal control has been one important part of the corporate government. The research will analyze features of internal control in domestic banks and characters of fraud and examine the relationship among financial performance of banks and internal control effectiveness.
First, we use five elements and twenty principles of Internal Control over Financial Reporting — Guidance for Smaller Public Companies to analyze banks of material weakness in internal control which have characteristic and feather. In order to understand what if relationship between financial performance of banks and internal control effectiveness. We class banks as two kinds of normal and abnormal and use variables of Central bank CAMELS Rating System to perform logistic regression module to examine correlation between material weakness in internal control and the quality of financial performance.
Based on the study, most banks involved in fraudulent activities are suffered from misappropriation of assets. The main reason is improper design of internal control、element of control activities and supervision are inactive especially；The weakness of fraud is that element of internal environment and risk assessment have not affected. We select four domestic banks as samples to find out what elements lead to material weakness in internal control system and give some recommends to improve. Through logistic regression module, we find out that there is a positive correlation between failed internal control and the quality of financial performance. Under Central bank CAMELS Rating System, the abnormal banks usually have poor assets quality、failing profitability、net loss、mouldering performance and blue-sky financial structure. Normal banks have not this phenomenon.

目錄
第一章 緒論
第一節 研究動機
第二節 研究目的
第三節 研究架構
第四節 研究限制
第二章 文獻探討
第一節 內部控制制度
第二節 內部控制與金融法規
第三節 舞弊風險與評估
第三章 研究方法
第一節 　　研究期間與樣本
第二節 研究假說
第三節 模型變數
第四節 實證模型
第四章 實證結果與分析
第一節 舞弊案例分析
第二節 實證模型分析
第五章 結論及建議
第一節 結論
第二節 建議

參考文獻
中文部分
1.王怡心,陳錦烽譯.美國COSO委員會著,2008.COSO財務報導的內部控制-較小型公開發行公司指引.
2.徐毓光,2007. 台灣衍生性金融商品、金融改革與風險管理. 世新大學管理學院財務金融學系,碩士學位論文
3.陳世欣,2005. 金控銀行之併購行為及影響. 國立中正大學財務金融研究所,碩士碩文.
4.夏峪泉,2006.我國企業採行沙賓法內部控制條文之適用性研究.國立台北大學會計系研究所 碩士論文.
5.康嫻莉,2006.公司治理與財務危機：以舞弊事件之上市櫃公司為例.國立政治大學會計系研究所 碩士論文.
6.張正忠,2000.台灣上市公司財務危機預警模式之建立-瀑布羅吉斯模式之應用.國立交通大學經營管理研究所 碩士論文.
7.黃麗花,2001.我國銀行業內部控制制度關鍵成功因素之研究.國立台北大學企業管理學研究所,碩士碩文.
8.黃玥琳,2005.沙賓法案第404條對金融機構財務報表內部控制之影響.國立政治大學經營管理碩士學程,碩士論文.
9.黃郁凱, 2006.財務報表舞弊預警模型.國立政治大學會計系研究所 碩士論文.
10.黃靜怡,2006.以CAMELS檢視金改後金融控股公司子銀行之績效.國立高雄第一科技大學金融營運所 碩士論文.
11.彭美玲,2005.本國銀行經營績效之實證研究.萬能科技大學工業管理系. 商管科技季刊.
12.會計研究發展基金會,2006.審計準則公報第43號「會計師對查核財務報表舞弊之責任」.
13.楊良猷,2006.後金融重建基金時代之金融安全網-中華商業銀行擠兌事件的啟示.國立臺灣科技大學財金系研究所 碩士論文.
14.廖文華,2004.金融機構公司治理之內部控制機制.中原大學財經法律學研究所,碩士論文.
15.鄭晶文,2004.巴塞爾銀行監理委員會與我國對銀行內部控制與內部稽核規範之比較.元智大學會計系研究所 碩士論文.
16.潘玉葉,1990.台灣股票上市公司財務危機預警分析.淡江大學管理科學研究所博士論文。
17.顏雅珊,2002.台灣地區商業銀行之經營績效評估.國立台北大學合作經濟研究所 碩士論文.
18.嚴文筆, 2004.「從內部控制觀點建構舞弊訴訟預警模型」.國立中正大學會計與資訊科技研究所,碩士論文.
19.蘇英婷,2007.分析美國財務報表舞弊特性與博達案之共通性研究.東吳大學會計學系研究所 碩士論文.
英文部分
1.Altman, E. I., 1968. Financial Ratios, Financial Ratios, Discriminant Analysis and the Prediction of Corporate Bankruptcy. Journal of Finance. Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 589-609
2.Association of Certified Fraud Examiners.2006,2004 Report to the Nation Occupational Fraud and Abuse.
3.Barbara A.Apostolou, John M.Hassell, Sally A.Webber and Glenn E.Sumners, 2001. The relative importance of management fraud risk factors. Behavioral Research in Accounting. Vol. 13; p. 1
4.Carter, M.E., and L.Lynch.2001. An examination of executive stock option repricing .Journal of Financial Economics. Vol. 61, Iss. 2; p. 207.
5.DeFond, M., and J.Jiambalvo.1991. Incidence and circumstance of accounting errors. The Accounting Review. Vol. 66, Iss. 3; p. 643
6.Fitzsimons, Adrian P. and Silliman, Benjamin R., 2007. SEC and PCAOB Plan to Grant Relief to Smaller Companies. Bank Accounting & Finance. Vol. 20 Issue 5, p42-46.
7.Hermanson, Heather M., 2000. Analysis of the Demand for Reporting on Internal Control. Accounting Horizons. Issue 3, p325-341, 17p.
8.Kinney, W.,and L.McDanel.1989. Characteristics of Firms Correcting Previously Reported Quarterly Earnings. Journal of Accounting and Economics. Vol. 11, Issue. 1; p71.
9.Krishnan, J.2005. Audit Committee Quality and Internal Control: An Empirical Analysis. The Accounting Review. Vol. 80, Issue. 2; p. 649
10.Kroeger, B.2003. Analysis & Perspective: Reporting internal controls for Sarbanes-Oxley: Lessons from the banking industry. BNA's Banking Report. Vol. 80, Issue. p15.
11.Mark S. Beasley, Joseph V. Carcello, Dana R. Hermanson, and Paul D. Lapides. 2000. Fraudulent Financial Reporting: Consideration of Industry Traits and Corporate Governance Mechanisms. Accounting Horizons. Vol. 14, Issue. 4; p. 441.
12.Obeua S.Persons, 1999. Using financial information to differentiate failed vs. surviving finance companies in Thailand: An implication for emerging economies. Multinational Finance Journal. Vol. 3, Issue. 2; p127.
13.Obeua S.Persons, 2005. The Relation between the New Corporate Governance Rule and the Likelihood of Financial Statement Fraud. Review of Accounting & Finance. Vol. 4, Issue. 2; p. 125.
14.Pain D., 2000. Leading Indicator Models of Banking Crises- a Critical Review. Bank of England. Review of Financial Stability. Vol.1, Issue. 3; p. 127
15.Robert Craig WEST, 1985. A Factor-Analytic Approach to Bank Condition. Journal of Banking and Finance. Vol. 9 Issue 2, p253-266.
16.Vennet, R.V. 2002. Cost and profit efficiency of financial conglomerates and universal banks in Europe. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking. Vol. 34 Issue 1, p254-282.
17.Weili Ge and Sarah Mcvay.2005. The disclosure of material weaknesses in internal control after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Accounting Horizons. Vol. 19 Issue 3, p137-158.


參考網站
1.http://www.coso.org/美國COSO委員會
2.http://law.moj.gov.tw/ 全國法規資料庫
3.http://www.acfe.com/ 美國舞弊稽核師協會
4.http://www.cbc.gov.tw/ 中央銀行
5.http://www.cdic.gov.tw/中央存款保險銀公司