公司負責人風險行為之背信評價

The Valuation of Risk Behavior Conducted by Responsible Persons of a Company

黃種甲(Chung-Chia Huang)

指導教授 ： 王皇玉

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2015年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2015.01670

摘要

本文旨在於探討公司之負責人從事風險行為時，是否構成刑法背信罪。
第一章為緒論。本文以開發國際購入環華證金之股票之實際案例，作為本文問題意識之發端及後續論述之引導。此案例在地方法院及高等法院兩次判決中，判決結果和理由有很大的差異，顯示出實務在處理實際案例時，對於背信罪中「違背任務」的判斷，缺乏一貫而實質的判斷標準。
從這一點出發，本文在第二章從背信罪的本質分析起，並進一步以法益為導向，分析條文中的各個要件之解釋與適用。此外，在公司依證券交易法發行股票時，證券交易法第171條也有類似於背信罪之規定，稱為特別背信。特別背信之保護法益為何，學說仍有爭論，本文採取特別背信罪為保護證券市場穩定而存在的看法，並以此為基礎，進行條文之解釋。在第二章的最後一節，本文則以公司之背信為討論核心，釐清在本人為公司之情況下，背信罪之保護對象及利益，並從「被害人同意或承諾」的觀點檢討股東會決議對於背信罪之影響，最後說明公司負責人違反公司法或證交法相關規定時，與「違背任務」之關聯。
第三章則以風險行為為討論對象，風險行為是一項指向利得和損失不確定的措施。從刑法的觀點而言，風險行為並非也不宜完全禁止，因此，在什麼樣的情況下，容許管理他人財產之人，採取具有風險性的行為，便是本章所要處理的核心問題。在此章節，本文先澄清風險行為容許性在刑法體系的定位，而後進一步介紹各學說對於容許性的判斷標準。最後提出本文見解：風險行為容許性應在構成要件中「違背任務」的層次進行檢討；至於標準則應區分為風險政策及注意義務兩個層次加以檢視。
第四章則針對風險行為後的損害進行討論。風險行為所產生的損害，具有不確定的特性，因此損害之計算時點或方式，無法以傳統方式加以解決。且損害額度的多寡，牽涉背信罪與特別背信罪之適用，後續的刑度差異甚大，因此必須謹慎認定。本章首先就財產權理論切入，並分析刑法學說上的財產概念，同時檢討德國法「財產危險」的概念在我國法下適用之可能及必要。最後，在具體的損害額度計算上，本文則提出應在違背任務之時點，以財務方法，進行損益計算，對待給付、期望地位都可以納入損益的計算中。
第五章為結論，簡要回顧本文相關的論述與見解，並以此檢討第一章提出之案例。

關鍵字

風險行為 ； 公司背信 ； 整體財產損害 ； 財產危險

並列摘要

The aim of this thesis was to discuss whether conducting risk behavior by the responsible persons of a company constitutes the offense of breach of trust.
The first chapter of this thesis was the introduction, started with a case, in which CDIB & Partners Investment Holding Corp purchased the shares of Global Securities Finance Corporation. This case showcased the difference between the decision and reasoning of the judgements by the district court and the high court, which also demonstrated the lack of coherent standard for “contrary to his duties” in judicial practice.
On this basis, the second chapter analyzed the interpretation and application of Art. 342 in the Criminal Code from the viewpoint of legal good of “breach of trust.” There is also a similar article in the Securities and Exchange Act, Article 171. However, the protected legal good of this article, still remains in dispute. This thesis proposed that the goal of Art. 171 in Securities and Exchange Act is to ensure the stability of the securities market, and the article ought to be interpreted on this basis. In the last section of this chapter, this thesis focused mainly on 3 parts of the breach of trust in the company, (1) clarified the protected interest and subject in Art. 342, (2) reviewed the effect of shareholders' meeting in criminal law from the viewpoint of “consent of victim” and (3) illustrated the relation between the element “contrary to his duties” and violating regulations in the Company Act, Securities and Exchange Act and others.
The third chapter discussed about risk behaviors. A risk behavior is defined as a measure with an uncertainty of loss and profit. This thesis proposed that it is inappropriate to punish all risk behaviors. The legality of risk behaviors shall be reviewed in the element of “contrary to his duties” and be examined by two separate standards—“risk policy” and “duty of care.”
The fourth chapter focused on damage-calculation. The amount of damage is related to the application of Art. 342 of the Criminal Code or Art. 171 Securities and Exchange Act. Penalty regulated by the former is imprisonment for not more than 5 years while that of the latter is imprisonment for 3-10 years. The damage of risk behavior is uncertain, and is difficult to calculate in the conventional method. This chapter started from the discussion of the theory of property and the analysis of the concept of property in criminal law, and examined the notion of “property in danger” rooted in German law and its application in Taiwan. Also, this thesis proposed that the damage shall be calculated by means of financial tools at the time the offender constitutes the element of “contrary to his duties”, and the expected returns shall also be included in the calculation.
The fifth chapter is conclusion, which gave an overview for the discussion of the four chapters above, and reviewed the case highlighted in the first chapter.

並列關鍵字

Risikogeschäfte ； Gesellschaftsuntreue ； Nachteil ； Vermögensgefährdung

參考文獻

林東茂（2009）。《刑法綜覽》。六版。台北：一品。

劉連煜（2012）。《新證券交易法實例研習》。台北：元照。

江宜樺（1995）。〈「政治是什麼？」─試析亞里斯多德的觀點〉。《台灣社會研究期刊》第19期。頁165-194。

周漾沂（2012）。〈從實質法概念重新定義法益：以法主體性論述為基礎〉。《臺大法學論叢》第41卷第3期。頁981-1053。

莊國銘（2003）。〈亞里斯多德論鞏固政治共同體的兩大德性：正義與友誼〉。《政治科學論叢》第18期。頁191-216。