憲法價值於私法關係之體現 ─以隱私權與表現自由之衝突與調和為例

The Realization of Constitutional Valuesin Private Legal Relationship —Conflict and Reconciliation of Privacy and Freedom of Expression

楊舒嵐(Shu-Lan Yang)

指導教授 ： 陳聰富

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2010年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2010.10595

摘要

私法規範處於憲法基本權利的客觀價值秩序之中，關於私法關係的認定，必須要符合憲法所宣示的價值。憲法學說上關於基本權第三者效力採取間接適用說，並且認為憲法規範必須透過概括規定或不確定法律概念始能適用到私法關係中；但參酌合憲性解釋的意義及適用，本文認為傳統上對於間接適用說的理解過於狹隘，憲法的放射效力放射於私法關係中，並非僅有概括規定或不確定法律概念的管道，而是私法規範中有解釋空間的概念、原則，皆必須依循憲法所宣示的價值而為解釋判斷。
以隱私權與表現自由的衝突與調和為例：在權利概念及內涵上，隱私權由侵權行為法所保護之權利演變為憲法所保護之基本權利，其在私法上與憲法上的概念內涵並無太多差異；然而具有憲法基本權利地位的表現自由權，是否屬於私法上的權利則不明確，本文認為隨著私人掌握發言管道的普遍性，私法關係中的表現自由亦有保護必要性，且表現自由應屬於民法第195條所稱「自由」的人格利益之一環。再者，權利衝突的利益衡量不僅是法律體系的問題，更是價值、理念的宣示與貫徹，而有賴於對憲法價值的深入思考，及對社會現狀的精確體察，應具體而精緻地分析個案情形以決定之；在我國法體系下，就隱私權與表現自由為利益權衡時，首應思考憲法或大法官解釋是否已宣示了權衡標準，如有，私法上即應以此為標準權衡相衝突的權利或利益；如未有此種標準存在，則法院必須詳盡思考個案中相衝突權利的價值，並藉助於憲法價值，綜合一切情事為比較衡量。具體而言，首應思考個案中所涉權利的憲法價值，確定權利保護範圍，其次，包括違法性、過失、概括條款、舉證責任、損害及救濟方式等，均蘊涵調和雙方利益的可能性，而可作為將憲法價值引進私法關係的管道；尤其違法性概念涉及被害人權利及加害人行為自由的調和，是權利權衡的關鍵概念，其次，對於侵害隱私權行為為「事前禁止」的手段，亦涉及限制表現自由的重大問題，更須妥適思考二權利的憲法價值，以為決定。最末，處理二基本權主體的價值或法益衡量的比例原則，具有「確認基本權利界限」的功能，亦可用於私法關係中為權利衝突權衡的判斷；釋憲實務中對基本權限制所採取的違憲審查基準，亦宣示了對權利價值的評斷，對於私法關係中的利益權衡亦具有參考價值。
藉由在私法關係個案中詳盡地思考憲法價值，不僅可維持法秩序的和諧，更可明瞭權利保護的界限。我國實務傾向於嚴格定義隱私權保護範圍，認為客觀環境不具隱密性即非屬隱私權保護範圍，並寬認行使表現自由權阻卻違法之情形，認為大眾感興趣之事即屬具備「新聞價值」、「知的權利」；然而，徵諸憲法保障隱私權之本旨在於「私領域不受侵擾」，凡屬個人私領域事務即應受隱私權保障，而憲法對新聞自由予以制度性保障之原因，在其促進公意形成的功能，界定「新聞價值」及「知的權利」時，即不能忽略公益性的考量，若在界定權利界限時，偏離上述憲法價值，即可能造成權利保護的失衡。從而，我國若干實務見解應有再予檢討之餘地，應由憲法價值出發，審慎決定權利保護之範圍、界限所在，方能在隱私權與表現自由的衝突之間，找出最理想的權衡方式。

關鍵字

憲法價值 ； 隱私權 ； 表現自由 ； 權利衝突與調和 ； 私法憲法化 ； 基本權第三人效力

並列摘要

Private law is under the objective system of values established by constitutional fundamental rights; therefore the determination of private legal relationship should be effected by constitutional values. Under the indirect application model of the third-party effect of basic rights, human rights can only affect private relationship through general clauses or open clauses. However, concerning the meaning and content of constitutional interpretation, the author holds that all interpretable concepts or principles in the private law can be the channel through which constitutional values flow into privte law.
Take the conflict and reconciliation of privacy and freedom of expression for example: the concept of the right to privacy is almost the same in private law and in the constitution; meanwhile, it is not clear whether freedom of expression is protected in private relationship. The author holds that freedom of expression should also be protected in private relationship, and it is protected by the “freedom” in §195 of the Civil Code. Secondly, the conflict of rights is not only an issue about legal system, but also an issue of value judgments. When balancing the right of privacy and the freedom of expression, first we should search is there a balancing standard declared by the Constitution or the Constitutional Court. If there is such a standard, we should follow the standard to determine private legal relationship; if not, the court should thoroughly consider the constitutional values of conflicting rights in the case to make dicision. To make it concrete, the court should use all private law elements, such as the concept of rights, illegitimacy, negligency, general clause, damage and remedy to form a gateway for the entry of constitutional values into private law. At last, the principle of proportionality as a formula of balancing the values conflicting rights, is also available to private law. In a nutshell, by the above means, we can make a full consideration of constitutional values in private law.
By thoroughly considering constitutional values in private legal relationship, we can keep the harmony of legal system and make boundaries of rights clear. Our courts tend to narrowly define the right of privacy, but widely admit the freedom of expression, the worthiness of news, and the right to know. However, if we take constitutional values into consideration, we will know that the right of privacy in the Constitution is to protect private zone from intervention; therefore, all affairs in private zone should be protected by the right of privacy. In addition, when we define “the worthiness of news” and “the right to know”, we should not neglect the aspect of public interest. When we try to balance conflicting rights, it is important to consider constitutional values in order to make an ideal decision of reconciliation.

並列關鍵字

constitutional values ； right of privacy ； freedom of expression ； the conflict and reconciliation of rights ； constitutionalisation of private law ； the third-party effect of basic rights

參考文獻

8.司法院印行，美國聯邦最高法院憲法判決選譯，第六輯，2008年1月。

28.張嘉尹，論「價值秩序」作為憲法學的基本概念，臺大法學論叢，第30卷第5期，2001年9月。

4.司法院大法官釋字第603號解釋專題研討發言紀錄，台灣本土法學雜誌，第75期，2005年10月。

29.廖福特，歐洲人權法，2003年5月。

2.王澤鑑，法律思維與民法實例，2001年7月。