析論特殊侵權行為內部關係求償問題－以危險事業經營態樣為例

因科技進步，人類工作與活動之危險發生可能性增加，為周全對於被害人之保護，各國紛紛立法增訂危險事業或活動之企業經營者責任，我國亦於1999年增訂民法第191條之3，課予危險事業經營者危險工作或活動責任。民法第191條之3之責任主體一般認為係危險事業之經營者，法條亦未有內部求償之規定，惟通常實際操作具有危險性之工作或活動之人多為該危險事業經營者之受僱人，或是承攬部分業務之承攬人；於危險發生時，危險事業經營者賠償損害後仍有依民法第188條第3項向受僱人主張內部求償，或依承攬契約向承攬人主張內部求償之可能。而此時是否應就危險事業經營者之內部求償權加以限制？蓋如認此時危險事業經營者得向受僱人或承攬人主張內部求償，似有將本應由危險事業經營者自行承擔之危險工作或活動責任轉嫁予受僱人或承攬人之嫌；然而如限制危險事業經營者內部求償權之行使，又有違肇致損害者應負最終責任之一般原則。本文探究民法第191條之3之責任性質，認為不應限制危險事業經營者之內部求償權，惟其所得求償之比例應有所限制，應類推適用民法第217條規定，依危險事業經營者、受僱人或承攬人對於危險發生之原因力定其內部責任比例，而危險事業經營者僅得就受僱人或承攬人之內部責任比例向其求償。

關鍵字

危險責任；內部求償；內部分擔比例

並列摘要

Due to the growth of science and technology, the danger of human work and activities has increased. To protect the victims comprehensively, various countries had formulated the law of dangerous activities liability. In 1999, Taiwan also formulated article 191-3 of Civil Code, which is about the responsibility for dangerous work or activities of the operator of a dangerous enterprise. The person responsible in article 191-3 of Civil Code is generally considered to be the operator of a dangerous enterprise, however, people who actually do the dangerous work or activities are mostly the employee or the undertaker of the dangerous enterprise operator. When the danger occurs, the dangerous enterprise operator may claims internal compensation from the employee according to article 188 paragraph 3 of Civil Code, or claims internal compensation from the undertaker according to the contract of hire of work. Should the right of internal compensation of the dangerous enterprise operator be restricted? If we allow the dangerous enterprise operator to claim internal compensation from the employee or the undertaker, there seems to be a suspicion of transferring the responsibility for dangerous work or activities, which should be undertaken by the dangerous enterprise operator, to the employee or the undertaker; however, if the right of internal compensation is restricted, we will violate the general principle that the person who caused the damage should be ultimately liable. This article explores the liability in article 191-3 of Civil Code, and believes that the right of internal compensation of dangerous enterprise operators should not be restricted, but the amount of their claims should be limited. Article 217 of Civil Code should be applied by analogy to determines the internal liability ratio between the dangerous enterprise operator and the employee or the undertaker, and the dangerous enterprise operator can only claim internal compensation from the employee or the undertaker by their internal liability ratio.