公司法人格獨立與有限責任制度為近代公司法上重要之發明,上述制度使得公司有獨立之人格且其所負之責任僅以其出資額為限,然上述公司法人格獨立與有限責任制度之優點若被濫用,則對公司債權人有所戕害。因此,英美法上遂有揭穿公司面紗原則之產生。揭穿公司面紗原則源於英美法,加上其屬於衡平法理,故在適用揭穿公司面紗原則時,較容易因為法官本身之想法而導致案件是否可以揭穿。本論文首先介紹比較法上揭穿公司面紗原則之相關理論及其構成要件後,接著點出揭穿公司面紗原則問題點所在,揭穿公司面紗原則的問題在於因其繫諸於法官主觀想法因而判決較容易導致不可預測及不一致性之問題。 至於我國公司法於民國102年1月30日修正公司法第154條第2項將揭穿公司面紗原則明文法化,以避免法院以「我國既為成文法國家,欲否認獨立公司之法人格,令其就他公司之對外行為負責,此一例外舉措,自須法有明文。」拒絕揭穿公司面紗原則於我國法之適用。本論文分析我國修法前及修法後實務判決對於揭穿公司面紗原則之態度為何,並就蒐集到之判決為一有系統之分析。惟我國揭穿公司面紗原則真的因為成文法化後就一勞永逸嗎?本論文認為因為條文本身的不確定法律要件過多,導致判決時容易因為法官本身對該不確定法律概念之認定不同,因而形成判決難以預測及不一致性之問題。因此,本論文針對公司法第154條第2項提出修法建議,並認為揭穿公司面紗原則應有適用於有限公司之餘地,故亦增訂公司法第99條第2項使揭穿公司面紗原則於有限公司亦得適用。
The corporate entity doctrine and the principle of limited liability are the important inventions in the modern company law. Because of these inventions, the company should be regarded as a independent entity and the shareholders should only be responsible for the money they put into the company. But when someone want to abuse these systems, it is not fair to the company creditor. So the “Piercing the corporate veil“ comes to figure out the problem. Piercing the corporate veil is an equity system, so the court decide to pierce the veil or not all depends on the judge. In this thesis, first introduce the theory of “piercing the corporate veil” and the elements of these theory. Second, introduce the problem of piercing the corporate veil, the problem is because the elements of “piercing the corporate veil” is so abstract, unpredictable and lack of consistent standard. In Taiwan, we amend our Company Act and accept the concept of “piercing the corporate veil” in January 30, 2013. This amendment can solve the court deny to use the “piercing the corporate veil” just because there is no statutory law in our Company Act. This thesis research the all judgments about “piercing the corporate veil” and then analysis these judgments. But is this amendment perfect? This thesis point out the weakness of the amendment and offer the revise of the amendment.