我國與日本勞工離職後競業禁止約款效力之比較法研究

A Comparative Study on Post-Employment Covenants Not to Compete between Taiwan and Japan

何宗霖(Zong-Lin He)

指導教授 ： 王能君

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2011年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2011.00596

摘要

競業禁止約款近年來逐漸擴及各個行業，非僅限於高科技行業，且不問勞工職位之高低，常被雇主要求簽訂離職後競業禁止約款。然而，若勞工負有離職後之競業禁止義務，可能無法活用其原本熟悉之知識或技能以謀生，對其憲法上所保障之職業選擇自由、工作權或生存權造成侵害。因此，有必要對此類約款設定其有效性之要件，以兼顧勞資雙方權益。
我國實務上競業禁止約款效力之審查標準，目前廣泛使用的五標準說、四標準說、三標準說，就筆者研究發現係參考自日本法上之競業禁止法理而來。因此，在各該審查標準之判斷上，日本法上之見解值得我國參考，能夠藉此提升我國實務判決之精度及可預測性。
然而，綜觀我國實務見解對於勞工離職後競業禁止約款之審查，仍未見一致之見解。在勞委會提出之修正草案，明文規定競業禁止約款之要件，或許能夠平息實務上採取約款效力判斷架構之分歧。不過，由於競業禁止約款內容（正當利益、區域、期間、代償措施等）之正當性及合理性，仍須因應各行業之特殊性，藉由司法機關累積一定案件形成標準。因此，我國之競業禁止法理，仍值得觀察與期待。

關鍵字

競業禁止 ； 代償措施 ； 營業秘密 ； 工作權

並列摘要

In recent years, the covenant not to compete gradually expanded to every single profession, not only to high technology businesses but also to lower position labors. They are always requested to sign the post-employment covenants not to compete by their employers. However, the labors could not make flexible use of their knowledge and skills to live which conflicts with the occupational option rights, the right to work or the right to live when they have the duties of the post-employment covenants not to compete. It must therefore be set up valid conditions for giving consideration to the rights to both labors and employers.
With regard to the review criteria of the covenant not to compete, the theories of five criteria, four criteria and three criteria have been widely used in practice of court in our country. After further research, my findings indicated that the criterion of judgement is in fact based on Japan case law theory. It is clear therefore that the Japan case law theory is worth referring while having a judgment of review criteria, and to improve the precision and the predictability of practical judgment.
In terms of post-employment covenants not to compete, there are still no consistent opinions in our country. However, after the Council of Labor Affairs proposed the amendment and to clearly stated the conditions of covenants not to compete, the problem of divergence of views might be solved.
Whereas, the legitimacy and rationality of covenant not to compete (proper benefit, region, period, compensation payment, etc.) must be in accordance with all kinds of businesses and to form a criterion according to case accumulation by judicial authority. On this basis it may be inferred that it seems still more effort must be invested into the covenant not to compete in our country before it can mature.

並列關鍵字

the post-employment covenant not to compete ； compensation payment ； trade secrets ； the right to work

參考文獻

11. 許慧貞，「勞工離職後競業禁止之研究」中原大學財經法律學系碩士論文，2007年。

13. 林更盛，定型化離職後競業禁止約款的審查--評最高法院九四年臺上字第一六八八號判決，台灣本土法學雜誌，第87期，2006年10月。

22. 曾勝珍，美國離職後競業禁止條款之適用探討—兼比較我國法，中正法學集刊，第14期，2004年1月。

2. 王松柏，英國習慣法上限制競業協議合法性之研究，東吳法律學報，第18卷，第3期，2007年4月。

5. 周光輝，「離職後競業禁止及其替代措施之研究－以車燈業技術勞工為例」，國立成功大學法律學研究所碩士論文，2004年。