輔仁法學第62期

食品捐贈乃針對在食物生產鏈被丟棄或浪費的食物，經由處理再分配給有需求者。食物捐贈可以減少糧食損失及廚餘等問題，提高生產效率及資源有效使用，避免糧食及資源浪費，乃是歐盟循環經濟之一項重要內涵及策略，並且符合2015年聯合國永續發展目標。食品捐贈亦可增進社會福祉，並提高糧食安全。在歐盟綠色新政下，食物捐贈將扮演更加重要的角色。
本文研究方法主要採取法律釋義法及政策分析法，針對歐盟食物捐贈之建制及實踐，從事法律解釋及政策分析。研究內容及主要議題包括：食物捐贈的概念與功能、歐盟食物捐贈的發展背景、法律架構、主管機關、政策工具、政策操作及實踐、歐盟食物捐贈的意涵、特徵、成效、影響、在某些會員國的實踐，以及對我國的啟示等。針對我國食物捐贈之建制、法律及政策從事比較研究，並提出一些建議，供我國參考，以改革並精進我國食物捐贈制度。

關鍵詞：食物捐贈、廚餘、循環經濟、歐盟食物捐贈指引、歐盟食物損失與浪費交流平台、台灣食物銀行法草案

Food donation is a process for the redistribution of food waste in the food production chain. Food donation therefore can reduce the scale of the food waste problem, and enhance production efficiency. Food waste is not only a moral and economic issue, but also negatively impacts the environment, the eco-system, and social welfare, etc. To address the food waste problem, the EU adopted food donation policy as a key element of the circular economy. Food donation is also consistent with Goal 12.3 of 2015 United Nations Sustainable Development, and plays a significant role under the EU Green Deal.
Based on legal interpretations and policy analysis, this paper reviews EU food donation law and policy, and their implications for Taiwan. The issues covered include: the concept and function of food donation, the EU food donation system, jurisprudence, the competent authorities, policies, significances, challenges and practices in some Member States as well as the implication on Taiwan. The EU system is compared with the food donation system in Taiwan, and some proposals are offered for reforming Taiwan’s law to enhance food donation system and social welfare, and contribute to Taiwan’s circular economy and sustainable development.

壹、前言
貳、食物捐贈的法理與論證
一、解決食物浪費
二、解決廚餘問題
三、食物權與健康權之保障
參、歐盟食品捐贈之建制
一、歐盟法律架構
二、歐盟主管機構及政策工具
三、會員國食品捐贈之規定與運作
肆、歐盟食物捐贈規範之意涵與啟示
一、歐盟及會員國實踐遭遇之問題
二、歐盟建制之意涵及影響
三、對台灣的啟示
伍、結論

人工智慧為醫學的發展帶來嶄新的活力。傳統醫療模式已經無法滿足社會進程發展的需求，因此人工智慧成為連接未來醫學模式的橋樑，人類醫師與智慧醫療共存的局面，已然出現！隨著人工智慧醫療在臨床醫療的投入，勢必大幅改變未來病人與醫師之間的互動關係，並衍生諸多法律問題。
雖然目前的人工智慧醫療，仍只是輔助的角色。醫師與人工智慧醫療的互動，有明顯的主從關係。理論上，醫師依照自己的專業歷練，不能完全依賴智慧醫療系統。但是，在智慧醫療如火如荼應用的情境下，醫療生態已經產生重大變化，並可能衍生許多法律爭議，醫師的確會面臨各種法律的風險。在各種法律風險之中，從醫師的立場看，可能引發的刑法風險更加受到重視。本文說明人工智慧醫療的運用的領域及其特色，提出掌握使用智慧醫療時應該遵守的「智慧醫療倫理準則」，並用以討論因為違反倫理準則可能存在的刑法風險以及應對之道。

關鍵詞：人工智慧、人工智慧醫療、醫療糾紛、刑事責任、智 慧醫療倫理準則、大數據、個人資料保護、深度學習、黑箱醫療、容許風險

Artificial intelligence brings brand new vitality into the development of medicine. The traditional medical care model can no longer meet the needs of the development of social process, and therefore artificial intelligence becomes a bridge connecting the future medical care model. The coexistence of human doctors and e-health has appeared! Along with the investment of e-health into clinical medical care, it must change the interaction a lot between patients and doctors in the future, and breeds many legal problems.
The current e-health still plays a supporting role only, so that the interaction between doctors and e-health has an obvious principal and subordinate relationship. In theory, according to the professional experiences of doctors, they cannot rely solely on the e-health system. However, under the circumstance where e-health is in full swing, the medical ecology has undergone major changes, and many legal disputes may arise. Doctors do confront with various legal risks, and, among those risks, the criminal risks that may be triggered are more important from a doctor’s position. This article explains the application fields of e-health and their characteristics, and proposes “the ethics guidelines for e-health” that shall be followed while using it as well as the criminal risks that may exist while violating it and the measure to cope with.

壹、前言
貳、運用智慧醫療的場域與特色
一、影像醫學的應用
二、病況的判讀評估
三、智慧健康管理
四、藥品的研發應用
參、運用智慧醫療宜遵守的倫理準則
一、以人為本，尊重自主權利
二、公平多元，避免歧視偏見
三、安全穩健，強化風險管控
四、可解釋性，加強責任劃分
五、維護隱私，保障個人資料
肆、運用智慧醫療衍生刑法風險的原因
一、未告知使用智慧醫療系統
二、未妥善使用智慧醫療系統
三、未謹慎使用病人隱私資料
四、未使用經核準的智慧醫材
伍、執行智慧醫療行為所生刑法風險之應對
一、運用智慧醫療應得病人同意
二、遵守運用智慧醫療系統的注意義務
三、衡平使用病人資訊與保障隱私
四、審慎評估及使用智慧醫療器材
陸、智慧醫療自主學習帶來的未來挑戰
一、醫師與智慧醫療主從關係的改變
二、醫師使用智慧醫療衍生責任的緩和
柒、結語

大法官釋字第770號解釋引出我國對於控制股東所主導現金逐出合併中，對少數股東保障上之疑義，學說與相關討論上更進一步指出，在現金逐出合併中，啟動現金逐出之門檻偏低、利害關係股東是否在董事會與股東會中迴避、特別委員會之職權、資訊揭露之充分程度以及權利救濟程序等，皆為現金逐出合併中少數股東權利保護再我國應檢討之重點。本文深入研究美國法律與法院判決對於控制股東主導交易中，控制股東之受託義務、交易公平性之審查標準、資訊揭露義務、特別委員會之設置與職責等之發展，並對我國之現行法制之相關問題做深入探討。本文希望藉由控制股東在現金逐出合併案中之受託義務建立，探討控制股東之受託義務內涵，進而提出我國將來在控制股東主導交易之法律規範修正，包含特別委員會之設置與職責等、司法審查標準之建立以及事後救濟程序等，以期對於我國在控制股東主導之交易中提升對少數股東權利之保護。

關鍵詞：控制股東、釋字第770號解釋、現金逐出、少數股東、特別委員會、整體公平性、受託義務

J.Y. Interpretation No. 770 introduces the questions about the protection of minority shareholders in cash-out mergers led by controlling shareholders. Scholars and related discussions further point out the additional issues, which include the relatively low requirements necessary to initiate a cash-out merger, whether interested shareholders will refrain from voting at the board and shareholders’ meetings, the power and duties of the special committee, the adequacy of the information disclosure, and the types of relief available for minority shareholders. This article makes an in-depth study of US laws and court decisions regarding controlling shareholders’ fiduciary duties, the review standards for cash-out mergers, information disclosure obligations, the functions and duties of special committee, and the related issues in Taiwan's current legal system. This article proposes to establish the fiduciary duties for controlling shareholders and amending the laws and regulations for controlling shareholder-led transactions, which include the enactment of the special committees with specific functions and duties, the construction of the judicial standard of review and the types of relief of minority shareholders, to strength the protection of minority shareholders’ rights in the controlling shareholder-led transactions.

壹、前言
貳、我國現金逐出合併之爭議
一、釋字第770號解釋
二、相關爭議分析
參、企業併購法修正草案
一、及時獲取併購資訊
二、大股東之利害關係與相關資訊之揭露
三、異議股東之收買請求權
肆、美國德拉瓦州法院關於控制股東主導之現金合併案相關判決
一、整體公平性標準之提出（Entire Fairness）－Weinberger v. UOP, Inc., 457 A.2d 701 (1983).
二、商業判斷法則（Business Judgement Rule）適用之提出：獨立（特別）委員會或知情少數股東之同意－Kahn v. Lynch Communication Systems, Inc., 638 A.2d 1110 (1994).
三、商業判斷法則適用之確立－MFW標準之確立：Worldwide Corp., 88 A.3d 635 (2014).
四、MFW標準之適用前提－「從一開始」（ab initio）要件：Flood v. Synutra international, Inc., 195 A.3d 754 (2018).
伍、美國德拉瓦州控制股東主導之現金逐出合併審查標準分析
一、控制股東對少數股東負有負有受託義務
二、審查標準分析
陸、我國法上對控制股東主導交易審查標準之建構－以現金逐出合併為中心
一、現金逐出合併中控制股東之受託義務
二、控制股東迴避義務
三、特別委員會與資訊揭露
柒、少數股東救濟途徑
一、董事會與股東會決議瑕疵
二、對董事、控制股東或特別委員會委員之損害賠償請求權
捌、結論

民法第799條之1第4項規定：「區分所有人間依規約所生的權利義務，繼受人應受拘束。其依其他約定所生之權利義務，特定繼受人對於約定之內容明知或可得而知者，亦同。」就約定得否對抗第三人，係區別「規約」及規約以外之「其他約定」，作不同之規定。後段所定係參照大法官釋字第349號解釋而來，比較法上甚為罕見，為我國特有之規定。本文從民法第799條之1第4項制定之沿革、約定之內容及約定之方式，來探究所謂「其他約定」之範圍。另「其他約定」得否溯及適用？所稱「可得而知」如何認定？本文均有詳細之解說。尤其，民法第826條之1亦屬分管契約對第三人效力之規範，其與民法第799條之1第4項後段之競合適用，即屬重要而值得探究之議題！

關鍵詞：規約、公寓大廈、分管契約、區分所有人會議決議、共有部分、專有部分、應有部分

The fourth paragraph of Article 799-1 regulates the rights and duties that derive from the master deed between the owners shall be binding upon the owners’ successors. The rights and duties deriving from other agreements shall also be applied to the specific successor, who knows or has a reason to know the content of the agreements. A distinction between the master deed and other agreements is made by examining whether or not the agreement is to be effective against a third person. The latter paragraph is based on J.Y. interpretation No.349, which is very rare in the comparative law and is unique in our country. This paper researches the scope of the so-called "other agreements" from the evolution of the fourth paragraph of Article 799-1, by looking at the content of the agreements included and the manner of the agreements formulated. Whether or not "other agreements" could be retroactively applied? How to discern the situation of having a reason to know the content of the agreements? This article has in-depth elaboration on those topics. In particular, Article 826-1 is also a norm governing the effective regulation against the third person, on what occasion and which of these two articles should have the priority to be applied, and how they would compete against each other are important topics worth further exploring.

壹、前言
貳、民法第799條之1第4項制定之沿革
參、依約定內容所定之範圍
一、應以規約約定之三種約定
二、共有部分及基地應有部分計算之約定
三、其他經區分所有人會議決議之事項
肆、依約定方式所定之範圍
一、管理委員會訂定之相關規章
二、區分所有人會議決議
三、全體區分所有人間之約定
四、部分區分所有人間之約定
伍、規約外約定之效力
一、與規約效力之不同
二、得否溯及適用
三、可得而知之認定
陸、於分管契約有利繼受人之特殊效力
一、繼受人之範圍
二、受拘束是否以明知或可得而知為限
三、如何繼受享有停車位專用權人之分管契約
四、繼受人之用益範圍與負擔之變更
柒、與民法第826條之1之競合適用
一、學說見解
二、實務見解
三、本文見解
捌、結論