透過您的圖書館登入
IP:54.226.226.30
  • 學位論文

論商業判斷法則適用於我國刑事判決之妥當性 ─以德國法為比較分析基礎

An Empirical Research on the application of the Business Judgment Rule in Criminal Cases in Taiwan - Comparative Analysis from the German Perspective

指導教授 : 蔡昌憲
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


在實務案件中可以發現,公司負責人或者企業經營者會提出關於商業判斷法則的抗辯,乃是由於商場上瞬息萬變,而企業經理者需要適時做出決策,但決策必有風險,所以他們主張,法院不應該以市場結果來事後諸葛,來論斷企業經營者在做出判斷當時是否合宜。商業判斷法則認可決策風險存在,體認損失並不一定直接來自於決策本身,並限縮法律介入的空間,尊重股東與股東所選任的公司負責人間的信賴關係。該原則寓有促進企業積極進取,容許在公司經營上或多或少的冒險,鼓勵公司負責人創新。 本文意欲討論大陸法系的德國、台灣受到英美法系的商業判斷法則衝擊後所為之因應調整。藉以與繼受德國法且同時採納美國法上規範的我國相比較,以德國為借鏡,思考我國刑法上有關商業判斷法則的規範體系。本文嘗試從司法偵查及法院之觀點論述商業判斷法則,檢視刑事案件法官適用商業判斷法則的理論,試著歸納出一個司法審查的標準,並探討刑事案件引進商業判斷法則是否有其法律上依據及其必要性。本論文的研究方法採用案例分析法,以我國最高法院、全臺灣各高等法院及各該地方法院之相關裁判為分析對象,進行較全面且系統性的整理,探討法院就具體事實運用商業判斷法則於刑事案件中的問題,以法院之刑事判決書與判決理由評析,並就法院之判決事實與邏輯觀念之架構過程加以分析,歸納出實務上商業判斷法則常於何種刑事案件適用,及其適用方式,並以此實證結果為基礎比較學說與實務見解之異同,最後探究商業判斷法則於刑事案件適用的妥適性。

並列摘要


In Taiwan, there are corporate responsible persons or Entrepreneurs try to use Business Judgment Rule to defend in some criminal cases. Entrepreneurs have to make decisions properly and immediately to deal with the constantly changing business world. They contend that, courts should not judge whether their decision is appropriate or not at that time base on market results. According to Business Judgment Rule, there are always decision making risks in markets, the lost may not directly from business decisions making itself, and respect the fiduciary duty between shareholders and corporate responsible persons who are elected by them, to reduce the law to intervene.This principle improves enterprise acts more positively, allows business to take risks more or less, and encourages corporate responsible persons to innovate. This article attempts to discuss the adjustments made by Germany and Taiwan. Because those two civil law system countries try to revise the law after it’s affected by business judgment rule from common law system. The law in Taiwan is mostly affected by civil law system, but also somehow influenced by common law system in United States. Germany, which face the similar situation like Taiwan. This article try to use Germany experience to deliberate the business judgment rule regulation system in criminal law. This article used the point of view which made by courts to discuss the business judgment rule. Checking that the court how to supply that theory in Taiwan. I tried to build a judicial revise system, and discuss the reason and necessity to induce business judgment rule in criminal cases. I used case analysis method as research method, and coordinate the criminal cases which made by supreme courts, Court of Appeals, and district courts in Taiwan. I would discuss the problem facing in criminal cases while those cases actually use business judgment rule, and to analyze court verdicts. For example, whether court’s application or analysis to deal with the fact and issue is proper or not. Therefore, what we try to find out is that what kind of criminal cases are often used business judgment rule, and how to use it. Besides, I use this empirical result as basis to compare theory and cases. Last but not least, I try to think about the suitability of business judgment rule in criminal cases.

參考文獻


吳志強 (2011),經濟刑法之背信罪與特別背信罪的再建構,國立台灣大學法律
陳彥良 (2006),股東會、董事會、監事會於德國公司治理法典中法規範之探討,政大法學評論,89期,頁143-191。
伍開遠 (2011),公司負責人違反忠實義務之背信行為:台灣高等法院九十九年度上易字第六七九號刑事判決之研究,財經法暨經濟法,27期,頁141-161。
呂潮澤 (2003),修正前後公務員圖利罪之比較適用,法令月刊,54卷4期,頁4-12。
陳麗娟,從德國「公司治理規約」看該國公司治理之改革,東海大學法學研究,26期,頁45-84。

延伸閱讀