摘要
本文所欲討論之主題是為因應實務運作需要所出現的具有特殊契約內容之行政契約。此種契約因契約內容中僅有人民的契約義務，而無約定行政機關的契約義務。此種契約義務傾斜至人民一方之契約，我國學界將其稱為「跛足行政契約」。 本文欲先介紹實務上發生類似跛足行政契約之實務案例，在檢視在各案例皆符合契約之要件，並介紹當中締約當事人所應負擔之契約義務後，接著介紹當事人的締約動機以及此種契約之容許性及可能發生的問題。 於次章對上述案例進行分析時，首先討論上述跛足契約關係之性質究為公法契約亦或私法契約，並舉出行政實務上與此種契約內容相近之私法契約做出比較，於性質上此類跛足契約關係應屬於行政法律關係。接著討論跛足行政契約在現行行政契約法制之分類中之定位應為何之疑慮。 再者，即討論跛足行政契約法於現行法制序下該如何控管之問題。首先藉由對於契約條款與契約外文書之解釋，讓行政機關之義務得以確定，藉其使跛足行政約得以通過行政契約書面性之要求。接著再透過推論，可得跛足行政契約應受行政程序法第137條雙務契約之合法性要件之控管之結論，並且其焦點應在於該契約內容是否有違反不當聯結禁止原則之可能性存在。最後對於跛足行政契約的瑕疵與法律效果進行討論。 次者，關於跛足行政契約之權利實現，首先討論跛足行政契約債務不履行之狀況，此時若依此契約內容，行政機關可向人民請求履行契約，但人民對行政機關並無法請求，故此時應類推適用民法上有關同時履行抗辯權之法理，使當行政機關在未履行契約外義務時，人民得以拒絕給付該契約義務。而進入行政訴訟程序後，人民因此種契約之特性，無法透過法院向行政機關請求履行，但當行政機關利用法院向人民請求時，人民仍得利用上述同時履行抗辯權，向行政機關拒絕給付。 最後，在回顧本篇論文重點之後，於文末提出幾點本文尚未處理有關跛足行政契約之問題點，盼之後有更多對於此問題之研究討論，使此種契約能夠成為實務上得以選擇適用之合法行政行為方式。
並列摘要
This report is focus on a special type of the Administrative Contract, this specific type of Administrative Contract is between the people and the government, and which only regulates the people’s obligation; also this Contract is intended for neglect the government’s Contract duty. The Contract lead to an effect that the Contract still binding two parties but obligation are unbalance as a lame person who need one leg (obligation)to stand up, yet he still needs tow leg to support the body(Contract). So it could be so called “The Lame Administrative Contract”. This paper’s objective is mainly about the permission, legitimacy and the legal remedy of the contract. The approach method use on this paper is by analyze the practical cases, in order to find out the motivation of the two parties, Regarding the permission of the contract, should be addressed to whether there is a manifestly restrict provision in law. The further question is about the legitimacy, Administrative Contract must comply with two requirements, and first, the contract should follow the legal form request which is regulate on Article 139 of the Administrative procedure Act, pursuant to Article 139 the contract should made in writing. The second request is related to the doctrine of“The payment made by the citizen shall be reasonably related with the performance to be rendered by the administrative authority.” Thus, lead the final discussion of the objective, when the dispute between the two parties is in the Administrative Litigation, the citizen could raises the “defense right of simultaneous performance” in the circumstance which the government did not obey the obligation establish by the contract. At the end of the report, submit a few more questions expect future research could be accomplished.