營業秘密於刑事程序中之保護—兼論營業秘密修法草案

營業秘密在現代社會中日趨重要，雖然企業在智慧財產中對於技術的保護也可能採取專利的方式來保護，然而此舉無異使得相關技術必須公開，可能因此失去產業優勢。故企業在現行營業秘密實體法規範建置慢慢妥善後，也會開始選擇以營業秘密法來保護自身的秘密與技術。而要達到保障營業秘密持有人被實體法所賦予的權力，當然必須要以訴訟來進行救濟。不過訴訟程序中又有許多程序會使得營業秘密遭受到洩漏，如公開審理、對質詰問等程序，該如何在訴訟中保護也成為一個課題。而在營業秘密案件討論保護措施方面，多數學者都是在討論民事程序應該要如何保護營業秘密，然而對於刑事程序中應該要如何保護營業秘密卻沒有太多的論述。故，本文希望透過比較法的觀點切入各個審判中會發生的問題，從偵查程序開始到審判程序的進行。以議題式的方式說明並提出自己的看法。而本文討論的部分主要著重在公開審理限制與證據開示和秘密保持命令、秘匿特權間的關係，並且也將會說明本次營業秘密法修法草案，並試圖提出本文認為在偵查中能夠如何更好保護營業秘密，同時不過度侵害當事人防禦權的方式。在偵查階段目前實務最迫切的就是偵查效率的促進，而為了促進偵查的效率，也有必須由檢察官主動揭露資料予原告辨識，而產生營業秘密洩漏的可能。並且近期釋憲實務又在人權考量下加強了當事人卷證資訊獲知權的保障，自然需要有制度來維繫偵查中營業秘密的保護，而本文認為現行規範下偵查不公開與營業秘密法第9條皆無法在為了促進偵查效率而主動公開營業秘密的前提下完整保護營業秘密，因此的確需要有偵查中的保密令，同時本文以為現行草案之規範以刑事原則與實務操作的觀點來看，皆有爭議。雖然並無太多外國法可供參考，然而本文仍參酌了美國起訴前保護令與我國相關刑事審理原則對於本次草案提出若干建議。至於審判中的營業祕密該如何保護，目前會需要防範的問題主要在證據開示與營業秘密的權衡，此時在刑事案件中因為涉及人身自由的限制更須注重當事人防禦權的保障。也因此本文參酌日本、美國法關於公開審理與保護令之規範與學者看法後，對於我國之公開審理限制及秘密保持命令制度提出了些許想法，希冀能更有效率同時不過度侵害當事人的防禦權下進行審判。

關鍵字

營業秘密；刑事審判；秘密保持命令；保密令；保護令；公開審理；證據開示

並列摘要

Trade secrets are becoming more and more important in modern society. Patent is a way for enterprises to protect their intellectual technology, but they risk disclosing their technology to public, for which they may lose the edge in the industry. Therefore, after the comprehensive trade secret act is established, enterprises could begin to choose such act to protect their own secrets and technology by means of litigation to exercise their rights. However, there are many procedures in the proceedings that could expose trade secrets, such as public hearings, quality questions, etc. For this reason, how to protect trade secrets in litigation has also become an issue. Most of Taiwan’s scholars are focusing on how to protect trade secret during the civil procedure, whereas its protection in criminal procedures is rarely discussed. Therefore, this article hopes to cut into the problems that will occur in each litigious process (from the beginning of the investigation procedure to the trial procedure) by comparative law. The main part of this article focuses on the discussion of public hearing restrictions. Likewise, the relationship between discovery and protective orders or trade secret privilege. Also, this article will analyze the draft of the trade secret act, in which I will make an effort to offer my own opinion on how to protect trade secrets better in the investigation without excessive infringement on the parties ‘right of defense. At the stage of the investigation, the most urgent thing is to promote the efficiency of the investigation. In order to promote the efficiency of the investigation, the prosecutor must take the initiative to disclose information to the plaintiff for identification, which may lead to the leakage of trade secrets. Moreover, the recent practice of J.Y. interpretation has strengthened the protection of the parties' right to view the evidence under the consideration of human rights. Naturally, there is a need for a system to maintain the protection of trade secrets in the investigation. This article argues that neither principle of secret investigation nor article 9 of the trade secrets law can fully protect trade secrets under the premise that prosecutor discloses to the plaintiff for identification. So, there is a need for a protective order during the investigation. At the same time, this article considers that the current draft is controversial from the point of view of criminal principles and practical operation. Although there is not much foreign law available for reference, this article still considers that Taiwan can draw a lesson from the US pre-indictment protective order (agreement) and take Taiwan’s criminal trial principles into consideration. As for how to protect the trade secrets in the trial, the problem that needs to be solved at present is how to balance between discovery and trade secrets. In my opinion, because criminal cases are usually involved with personal liberty, it is necessary to pay more attention to the protection of the parties' defense rights. Hence, after considering the acts and scholars' opinions on public hearing and protective orders in japan and the United States. This article puts forward some suggestions about Taiwan’s public hearing restrictions and protective order system and hopes Taiwan’s trade secrets protection system can be more efficient without excessively infringing on the parties' right of defense.