- 學位論文
代表人責任作為他人行為責任
Representative Liability Under the Tortious Liability for Others
摘要
民法第28條代表人責任向來被理解為「法人自己行為責任」，惟經最高法院統一見解後，民法第184條加入法人侵權責任體系，民法第28條若維持舊有解釋，將不具備獨立規範實益，亦無法支撐責任要件之擴張解釋。本文認為應正確定性代表人責任為「法人他人行為責任」，係法人作為責任主體，為其代表人之侵害行為負擔賠償責任。 檢驗他人行為責任中常見之理論基礎後，本文認為法人為代表人負責之正當性源自於交易安全及信賴保護，基於可責於法人之事由，代表人作成侵害行為具備彰顯法人團體名義之外觀，受害人對此外觀產生正當信賴，進而促使侵害行為作成，或擴大損害範圍，此際法人對代表人之侵害行為應負擔損害賠償責任，不應由正當信賴之受害人承擔交易安全風險。因我國侵權責任法未有具體落實保護交易安全之規定，故本文以美國代理法之「表見授權原則」作為解釋之參考對象。 確立理論基礎後，規範之責任成立要件及法律效果必須遵循理論基礎解釋，課予法人團體損害賠償責任始具備正當性。是以，本文依照表見授權原則及交易安全保護之理論基礎，逐一檢視並詮釋代表人責任之「代表關係」、「執行職務」、「代表人成立侵權責任」等成立要件，亦對法人與代表人內部分擔比例進行調整。 最末，除民法之代表人責任外，於本文觀點下，公司法第23條第2項之公司負責人責任亦應解釋為「法人他人行為責任」之一種，釐清規範之責任定性後，將有助於回答公司負責人責任有關消滅時效、過失或無過失責任、股東可否作為求償主體等長年爭議。
並列摘要
Article 28 of the Civil Code traditionally represents the understanding that "the responsibility of the juridical persons itself." However, the Taiwanese Supreme Court has issued unified judicial interpretations on juristic person tort liability. If the interpretation of Article 28 of the Civil Code remains unchanged, there may be legal inconsistencies. This paper argues that the "representative liability" should be interpreted as "liability for others," where the juristic person assumes liability for damages caused by its representatives. After examining the common doctrines of liability for others, this article argues that the juristic person of holding corporations responsible through their representatives stems from transaction security and legitimate expectation. Since our country's tort law does not have specific article to protect transaction security, this article uses the "apparent authority" in U.S. agency law as a reference. Once basic doctrines are established, the elements for establishing liability and the legal effects must adhere to these foundational doctrines for the juristic person of holding liability for others. Therefore, this article examines the elements of representative liability such as "representation," "performance of duties," etc., based on apparent authority and protection of transaction security. It also adjusts the legal effects of representative liability. In addition, besides representative liability, Article 23(2) of the Company Law should also be interpreted as " liability for others." Adopting " liability for others " helps address legal disputes related to Article 23(2) of the Company Law concerning issues such as " extinctive prescription," "liability with or without fault," and others.