公司負責人違反忠實義務之背信行為：台灣高等法院九十九年度上易字第六七九號刑事判決之研究

The Behavior of Breach of Trust of Violation of Duty of Loyalty of the Responsible Person of a Company: A Study of Criminal Judgment of Taiwan High Court 99-Shang-Yi-Zi-No. 679

伍開遠(Kai-Yuan Wu)

《財產法暨經濟法》 27期 (2011/09) Pp. 141-160

https://doi.org/10.29825/PELJ.201109.0004

摘要

本文欲探討之問題為，當公司負責人業務執行上，違反公司法所規定之忠實義務，致公司受有損害時，是否即意味該當刑法背信罪「為他人處理事務，意圖為自己或第三人不法之利益，或損害本人之利益，而為違背其任務之行為，致生損害於本人之財產或其他利益」之構成要件。台灣高等法院於99年度上易字第679號背信案中，就此一問題，遵循該院歷來之見解，並未明確加以說明。本文建議，針對此一問題，參考德國之模式，建立公司法與刑法兩階段之審查基準。第一階段審查，案件是否具備「公司法上之義務違反」，第二階段則審查，案件是否具備「刑法上之嚴重義務違反」，並將兩階段之審查，於判決理由中詳加論述。實務上若能如此而為，從德國刑法之觀點而言，違反刑法最後手段原則之可能性，自係較低。至於何謂刑法第342條背信罪之「嚴重義務違反」，可參考德國公司法上之義務違反達到刑法上嚴重之標準，經由司法實踐而逐步建立適當之標準，如此台灣刑法背信罪構成要件之適用，勢必將會更加嚴謹與完善。

關鍵字

背信 ； 公司負責人 ； 忠實義務違反 ； 不忠誠 ； 嚴重

並列摘要

The purpose of the text is to discuss the following question: when conducting the business operation, the responsible person of a company has acted contrary to the duty of loyalty under the Company Act and shall be liable for damages to be sustained by the company there-from, the question arise as to whether the behavior conforms to the constituent elements of breach of trust of Criminal Law, which is quoted as ”a person who manages the affairs of another for purpose to takes an illegal benefit for himself or for a third person or to harm the interests of his principal and who acts contrary to his duties and thereby causes loss to the property or other interest of the principal”. In the case of breach of trust labeled 99- Shang-Yi-Zi-679, Taiwan High Court continued to follow its former opinion and did not illustrate this question precisely. This text suggests establish the benchmarks of examination related to Company Act and Criminal Law respectively by referring to Germany's models. The first step is to examine whether the cases have ”violation of duty in Company Act”. The second step is to examine whether the cases have ”grave violation of duty in Criminal Law”. The examinations in two steps should be discussed carefully in the reasons for the sentence. If such can be done in practice, the possibility of violating principle of last resort of Criminal Law is low from the point of view of German Criminal Law. As to what ”grave violation of duty” of breach of trust of article 342 of Criminal Law means, we may refer to violation of duty of the Company Act in Germany achieving grave standard of Criminal Law, and establish appropriate standards gradually by the judicial practice. In consequence, the applicability of constituent elements of breach of trust of Criminal Law in Taiwan is bound to be more rigorous and complete.

並列關鍵字

breach of trust ； the responsible person of a company ； violation of duty of loyalty ； breach of fidelity ； grave