本文立足于证券虚假陈述领域，以独立董事虚假陈述的民事责任研究为主题，认为独立董事在其虚假陈述司法案件中所承担的民事责任指向的是投资者，因此该责任指的是对于第三人的责任。这其中既包括公司董事对第三人承担的信义义务和法律规定的法定义务所导致的法定责任，也包括公司董事对第三人利益不得侵害的义务所导致的侵权责任。两种不同性质的责任区分标准在于独立董事主观上是否具有故意或重大过失。就责任承担形式而言，本文结合司法实践的发展，在传统的连带责任理论基础上，通过“半叠加的分别侵权行为”理论证成比例连带责任承担形式的合理性与可行性，同时通过该理论模式对“比例”进行解读。独立董事不同于一般董事，其中比例连带责任中“比例”的判断关键在于其勤勉尽责的特殊性判断标准，其中包括中和理性履职标准、商业判断规则引入、勤勉履职度量衡以及相关配套制度。最后，为了更好地督促独立董事勤勉履职、更合理地承担独立董事的民事责任，借鉴现有的制度实践，为完善我国独立董事责任承担机制提供相关意见建议。

Based on the field of securities misrepresentation, this article takes the civil liability of independent directors in misrepresentation cases as its theme and argues that the civil liability borne by independent directors in their misrepresentation judicial cases is directed to investors, and therefore the liability refers to the liability for third parties. This includes both statutory liability arising from the fiduciary duties of company directors to third parties and statutory obligations under the law, as well as tort liability arising from the obligation of company directors not to infringe on the interests of third parties. The criteria for distinguishing between the two different types of liability lies in whether the independent director is intentional or grossly negligent. In terms of the form of liability, this article takes into account the development of judicial practice and, on the basis of the traditional theory of joint and several liability, demonstrates the reasonableness and feasibility of the form of proportional joint and several liability through the theory of “semi-overlapping separate torts”, while interpreting the “proportional” liability through this theoretical model. Independent directors are different from ordinary directors in that the key to judging the “proportionality” of Bili Liandai liability lies in the special criteria for judging their diligence, including the standard of neutral and rational performance of duties, the rules of commercial judgment, the measure of diligent performance and the relevant supporting system. Finally, in order to better urge independent directors to perform their duties diligently and assume the civil liability of independent directors in a more reasonable manner, this article draws on the existing institutional practice to provide relevant suggestions.