輔仁法學第44期

公務員貪贓枉法，古今皆然、中外咸同，人民深惡痛絕，世界各國無不制定政策，打擊貪瀆。公務員貪瀆犯罪中，受賄犯罪尤其是社會關注焦點。主要理由是，受賄犯罪的不法利益龐大，官商相互勾結，極易形成權貴犯罪的共犯結構，公務員受賄行為忽視行政部門運作的公益性，更會嚴重損壞政府的廉潔與威信，塑造國家公權力可買賣性的印象，危及人民對政府的信任，更破壞整體社會秩序。長久以來，我國公務員貪污受賄問題嚴重，本文為求解決之道，先就刑法上公務員的概念進行說明，釐清2005年刑法修法前後的差異，並透過歸納分析，介紹各種新興受賄行為的隱密性與複雜型態。其次，說明公務員受賄犯罪的主要特徵及處罰規定，希冀從法規範的視野，尋求我國受賄犯罪的立法設計與適用困難。最後，對於受賄犯罪的相關法制提出立法建議，希望透過明確的法律規範，建構防治貪污受賄犯罪的完善機制。

關鍵字：公務員、貪污、賄賂、隱密性、受賄行為

Civil servants’ corruption has been a crime for a long time, from ancient to modern societies, from Taiwan to other countries, there is still no change. People hate corruption; hence, many countries have set up a series of policies to combat it. Civil servants taking bribes is always paid attention. The main reason, having accepted a huge sum bribed by the merchant, the civil servant makes collusion with the briber, forming an accomplice structure, as it is often the case. The crime of bribery ignores the public welfare of administration, furthermore, seriously threatens the integrity of government. It leaves people an impression that the public authority can be bargained; as a result, the governmental trust will be endangered and the social order will be deteriorated.
Bribery in Taiwan has become a serious problem for a long time. In order to solve it, this paper starts with the introduction of civil servants from the viewpoints of criminal law, by definition of which several differences between pre and post amended Criminal Code 2005 are clarified. Moreover, the introduction of new kind of secret and complex pattern relating to taking bribes will be given by a generalizing and analyzing way. Secondly, the main characteristics of bribery and related punishment are explained. Finally, legislative suggestions are drawn. It is anticipated that a perfect mechanism for combating briberies can be established through a set of clear legal norms.

Keywords: Civil Servants, Corruption, Briberies, Nature of Secret, Taking Bribes

目 次
壹、前言
貳、刑法上公務員的概念
一、2005年刑法修正前
二、2005年刑法修正後
（一）身分公務員
（二）授權公務員
（三）委託公務員
三、修法未決的疑慮
參、受賄行為的型態及處罰規範
一、受賄行為的型態
（一）受賄行為的基本型態
（二）受賄行為的特殊型態
二、受賄犯罪的處罰
肆、杜絕受賄犯罪的立法建議
一、立法規範回歸普通刑法
二、修正規範內容的不明確
三、避免過度重視刑罰威嚇
四、妥善運用財產來源不明罪
伍、結語

英國於2010年通過新賄賂法（Bribery Act of 2010），該法可說是法學先進國最新的反貪污法律，自值重視。本文經由比較法的研究取經，考量英國最新反貪污立法，接著討論我國現行反貪污法制的規定，檢討這些成罪條文的適當性。最後則借鏡英國最新反貪污立法，對我國相關法制提出具有建設性的修正方向。

關鍵字：反貪污、賄賂、回扣、英國2010年賄賂法、財產來源不明罪

The UK has passed the new Bribery Act of 2010 which is the newest legislation for anticorruption in the world. This article aims to discuss the present anticorruption legislation in Taiwan with regard to the UK’s new regulation. The author tries to analyze the legal framework in Taiwan, review its function and propose a better way to combat corruptions by means of criminal punishment.

Keywords: Anticorruption, Bribery, Kick-back, Bribery Act of 2010 UK,Crime of Illicit Property

目 次
壹、導論—行政效能與政府廉潔的兩難
貳、我國現行反貪污的立法架構
一、具體規範
二、我國現行反貪污法制的問題
（一）斡旋收賄行為的處罰障礙
（二）回扣與賄賂對價關係的判定疑義
（三）財產來源不明罪的違憲疑慮
三、小結
參、英國新賄賂法的立法與規範
一、立法沿革
二、規範內容
（一）概說
（二）四種主要的犯罪構成要件
肆、英國新賄賂法對我國立法的啟示
一、反貪污的立法架構
二、賂賄對價的職務內涵
三、賄賂對價關係的認定問題
四、回扣、報酬型賄賂與圖利罪的修正方向
（一）事前賄賂
（二）事後賄賂
五、斡旋收賄行為的處罰
六、向外國公務員行賄的立法
伍、結語

關於醫療契約不完全給付可歸責性要件之舉證責任，本件判決以為，若債權人已證明有債之關係存在，並因債務人不履行債務而受有損害，即得請求債務人負債務不履行責任，倘債務人抗辯損害之發生為不可歸責於債務人之事由所致，自應由其負舉證責任，如未能舉證證明，即不能免責。法邏輯上，由病方（債權人）及醫方（債務人）分別就醫療契約不完全給付之「客觀義務違反」及「主觀可歸責性要件」負舉證責任，應為可採。惟若認為凡病方因醫療契約履行相關之事由受有損害，即得請求醫方負債務不履行責任，醫方須舉證證明其不可歸責，方能免責，則論理上恐有跳躍，而有混淆「醫療損害」與「醫療契約義務違反」之虞。醫療給付係方法債務，契約義務違反與否之判斷須視醫療給付是否違反通認之醫療準則，而在晚近侵權行為過失之判斷採客觀標準之趨勢下，要求病方就醫方違反醫療契約義務舉證，與要求病方就醫療侵權行為之過失舉證，實質上並無差異。準此，無論病方主張侵權責任或契約責任，法院於操作舉證責任分配時，宜先令病方就「整個醫療行為事實是否違反客觀醫療準則」負舉證之責，而基於醫療訴訟中醫病雙方武器不平等之本質，再依各種舉證責任減輕之具體規則，調整雙方間舉證責任分配。

關鍵詞：醫療契約、不完全給付、舉證責任、武器平等原則、防禦性醫療行為

The number of malpractice claims filed in Taiwan against physicians has increased significantly in the recent decades. Medical malpractice litigations are characterized by a huge gap in medical knowledge between physicians and patients, leading to an unequal status between both parties in the trials. Since the amendment and promulgation of Article 82 of the Medical Care Act, there has been a consensus that strict liability is no longer applicable in medical litigations, and negligence becomes an essential element for establishing the liability of medical practitioners. In addition to modifying liability rules, an alternative for achieving equality of arms is to relieve the plaintiffs from the burden of proof. However, the burden of proof should be adjusted with precaution, because an excessive shift might contribute to defensive medicine.
For medical civil litigations in Taiwan, the plaintiff (i.e. the patient) can start an action based on contractual liabilities, tort liabilities, or both. If the plaintiff claims based on contractual liabilities, it is commonly held by the courts that the presence of medical injuries stands for the physician’s failure to undertake contractual duties, so that the physician has to prove he is not negligent with regards to the medical service. We consider these holdings as inappropriate, as the judgment of the performance in medical contracts should rely on the medical service per se instead of the treatment results. Over-charging the physician with the burden of proof will inevitably lead to defensive medicine. In our opinions, the presence of medical negligence should be assessed according to objective standards or guidelines which a reasonable physician should follow in the medical practice. Consequently, the court decisions made on contractual liabilities shall not deviate significantly from those made on tort liabilities. In principle, the burden of proof should be allocated to the plaintiff first, with specific rules applied to ease the plaintiff’s burden of proof to achieve the equality of arms in medical civil litigations.

Keywords: Medical Contract, Incomplete Performance, Burden of Proof, Equality of Arms, Defensive Medicine

目 次
壹、案例事實與判決要旨
一、案例事實
二、判決要旨
（一）原審判決具理由矛盾之情形
（二）原審判決違反經驗法則
（三）債務不履行應由被醫療提供者就其不可歸責舉證證明
（四）原審未詳加調查醫療提供者是否已盡其善良管理人之注意義務
貳、問題之提出
參、基本理論分析
一、醫療契約之不完全給付
（一）醫療提供者之契約義務
（二）醫療契約不完全給付之成立
（三）醫療契約不完全給付之判斷
二、不完全給付可歸責性要件之舉證責任
（一）德國實務學說見解
（二）我國實務學說見解
三、醫療契約不完全給付可歸責性要件之舉證責任
（一）德國實務學說見解
（二）我國實務學說見解
（三）本文見解
四、請求權競合之舉證責任
（一）醫療侵權行為之舉證責任
（二）醫療侵權行為與醫療契約責任請求權競合之舉證責任
肆、對本件判決之評估
伍、結論

共同訴訟向來為民事訴訟法重要之課題。在德國學說上將共同訴訟區分為普通共同訴訟及必要共同訴訟，並將必要共同訴訟細分為基於實體法上之理由而構成必要共同訴訟及基於訴訟法上之理由而構成必要共同訴訟之情形。反觀我國學說上則將必要共同訴訟區分為固有必要共同訴訟及類似必要共同訴訟，於用語上何者較為妥當。而普通共同訴訟及必要共同訴訟，以及固有必要共同訴訟及類似必要共同訴訟，於實際個案中究應如何區分，其區分之具體標準何在。尤其在共有物返還訴訟之情形，其究屬普通共同訴訟抑或類似必要共同訴訟。於確認共有物所有權存在或不存在訴訟，究屬類似必要訴訟或固有必要共同訴訟之型態。連帶債務人共同被訴之情形，究屬普通共同訴訟抑或類似必要共同訴訟，凡此均有作更進一步研究之必要。除共同訴訟型態之判斷外，本文尚著重共同訴訟效力之探討，尤其我國現行民事訴訟法第56條之規定是否有更進一步予以修正之必要。再者，我國民事訴訟法於2003年增訂第56條之1「強制追加原告」之規定，其與基於實體法理由而構成必要共同訴訟所欲彰顯之「共同處分原則」及處分權主義之關係如何，其未來修法之方向應為如何，亦成為探討之重點。本文期透過訴訟法與實體法之相互結合，尋求判斷共同訴訟型態之具體判斷標準，並依此具體標準檢視個別不同訴訟事件狀況之共同訴訟型態及其相關之效力。

關鍵字：共同訴訟、普通共同訴訟、必要共同訴訟、共有物返還請求、連帶債務、強制原告之追加

The intention of the essay is to complete and clarify the aim, requirements, effects and types of the joint action in the civil procedure. The joint action can be divided into the necessary joint action and common joint action. In the German literature necessary joint action is separated according to the different foundation into the necessary joint action on account of the substantive law and because of the procudural law. In contrast, such joint action will be devided into the inherent necessary and similar necessary in Taiwan literature . Which concept is adequate, needs further researchs . The assessment criteria for the types of joint action are still unclear. How to estimate the type of the joint action in the concerte cases, is also doubtful, especially when several or all co-owner bring the rei vindicatio action against the third party for the whole thing , while some co-owner bring the lawsuit for the affirmation of the co-ownership or when several of the debtors of the joint-obligation are jointly sued by the creditor. Moreover, some questions concerning effects of the joint action will be also analyzed in the essay , particularly whether Section 56 of Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure is a proper regulation. The rule of required plaintiffs has been added in 2003 in Section 56-1 of Taiwan Code of Civil Procedure. This amendment raises the following important academic issues, what is the relationship between that provision and the principle of the conjoint disposition in the substantive law as well as the disposition principle in the procedural law and if this regulation is adequate for Taiwan civil procedure. The essay takes the approach of combining the procedural law with the substantive law to find out the assessment criteria for the types of joint action and hereby to judge the pertinent type of the joint action in the concrete cases and its related effect.

Keywords： Joint Action, Common Joint Action, Necessary Joint Action, Rei Vindicatio, Joint Obligation, Joinder of Involuntary Plaintiff

目 次
壹、前言
貳、共同訴訟之目的、要件及型態
一、共同訴訟之目的
二、共同訴訟之要件
三、共同訴訟之型態
（一）普通共同訴訟
（二）必要共同訴訟
四、共同訴訟之效力
（一）普通共同訴訟之效力
（二）必要共同訴訟之效力
參、個別訴訟事件共同訴訟型態之研析
一、共有物返還訴訟
（一）德國學說見解
（二）我國學說見解
（三）本文見解
二、確認共有物所有權存在或不存在訴訟
三、連帶債務人共同被訴
（一）實務見解
（二）學說見解
（三）本文見解
四、連帶債權人共同起訴
五、不可分債權人共同起訴
六、不可分債務人共同被訴
七、可分債務或可分債權人共同訴訟
八、保證人與主債務人共同被訴
肆、我國民事訴訟法第56條之1之問題
伍、結論

因為保險法第94條之規定，和解參與於我國一直以來均將其定位為保險人之權利。然於2009年時，台灣高等法院台南高分院於個案中，突破傳統之看法，認定責任保險人對於合理和解要約具有接受之義務，否則應負損害賠償責任，此為我國近年來司法判決發展和解義務之開端。然而，除了接受合理之和解要約外，責任保險人之和解義務似應更為全面。本文藉由介紹責任保險最為蓬勃之美國所發展有關和解義務內涵，包含責任保險人義務性質演進、和解義務之意義與和解行為之內涵、違反和解義務之請求權性質及效果、美國學者對和解義務之改革意見等，並剖析我國目前現況，參酌美國法上之發展提出相關建議。希冀藉由本文之介紹，作為有關單位未來於建構和解義務內涵之參考。

關鍵字：和解義務、誠信善意與公平交易之義務、財務安全與心境安寧、和解協商、合理和解要約、惡意行為請求權、超額判決

Participation in settlement has always been considered as the insurer’s right due to Article 93 of Insurance Law. In 2009, the Tainan Branch, Taiwan High Court made a breakthrough on the aforesaid traditional opinion in a case and it noted that the liability insurer has the duty to accept reasonable settlement offer or it is liable for the damage for its failure to do that. In recent years, this is the very beginning of developing duty to settle in Taiwan’s judicial practice. In addition to accepting reasonable settlement offer, however, the contents of liability insurer’s duty to settle should be much comprehensive. This paper introduces the contents of duty to settle in United States, where the development of liability insurance is the most blooming in the world, including the evolution of the nature of duty to settle, the definition of duty to settle and the contents of the settlement conduct, the nature of claims and effects of breach of duty to settle and the opinions for reformations of duty to settle by the scholars. In addition, it analyzes the related issues in Taiwan and extends some recommends based on the development in the United States. The author hopes that when the authorities plan to structure the contents of the liability insurer’s duty to settle in the future, the contents of this paper could be adopted as one of the reference resources.

Keywords: Duty to Settle, Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, Financial Security and Peace of Mind, Settlement Negotiation, Reasonable Settlement Offer, Bad Faith Claims, Excess Judgment

目 次
壹、前言
貳、和解義務之發展
一、責任保險人義務之發展
二、和解義務之意義
（一）協助和解行為
（二）給付和解金
三、和解義務之性質
四、和解條款之演進
（一）一般和解條款
（二）同意和解條款
（三）調停條款
參、美國法上和解義務之內涵
一、和解義務之履行範圍
（一）一般原則
（二）落入承保範圍有疑義
（三）責任關係判決作成後
二、和解行為之準則
（一）報告和解協商之過程
（二）接受合理之和解要約
（三）主動進行和解協商與反要約
（四）取得被保險人同意
（五）考量被保險人整體之利益
（六）公平考量每位被保險人之個人利益
三、違反和解義務之請求權性質及效果
（一）違反和解義務之請求權性質
（二）損害賠償範圍
四、學者對和解義務之改革意見
（一）在合理範圍內得要求被保險人分擔和解金
（二）接受和解之標準應採嚴格責任說
肆、我國現況之分析與建議
一、我國現況
（一）保險契約條款
（二）保險法
（三）小結
二、建議
（一）建議條文
（二）說明
伍、結論