摘要 本篇論文的討論起點來自柏拉圖如何面對靈魂能夠認知真理的這個可能性。柏拉圖設立那與變動的感覺現象完全分離的「不變動的『相』」作為知識得以成立的條件，這個歷史緣由可從亞里士多德的記載當中知道：一方面，柏拉圖認同克拉梯樓斯與赫拉克利圖學派所主張的感覺現象的永遠流動、無一停留，並因此認為絕不可能有關於感覺現象的知識，然而，另一方面，那致力於倫理事物研究的蘇格拉底則堅持必定有那可被定義的知識對象得以被思考與認知；由於受到這兩方所堅持的信念，柏拉圖則在為了拯救現象並使思考與知識得以可能的情況下，他設立了那必須與變動的感覺現象完全分離的相來作為感覺現象之所以如此存在的原因，並在透過那分有相的感覺現象當中，靈魂得以思考並回憶起關於相的知識，而由此拯救現象並保全靈魂得以思考且獲得知識的可能性。 然而，柏拉圖的分離相論卻有可能引發諸多困難，這主要可由《巴曼尼德斯篇》裡的少年蘇格拉底所遭遇到的三個困境所表現出來：○1少年蘇格拉底對於是否有卑下者的相的存在，顯得猶疑不定；○2由於無法回答相與現象之間到底是如何分有，以致於分有成為不可能；○3更進一步地，正是由於相與現象彼此的完全分離，以致於原本肩負拯救現象這使命的相，到頭來卻反而根本無法拯救現象，而且也面臨無法為人所知的這個最大困境。 這三個困境其實正是柏拉圖真理之路---愛智者如何能擁有那與現象完全分離的相的知識？---所蘊含的兩個一體兩面的論題：第一，思考與知識的可能性如何成立？也就是，相如何拯救現象？第二，愛智者要以什麼樣的方法才能正確地獲得相的知識以成為真正的哲學家？關於第一個論題，筆者認為，柏拉圖在《巴曼尼德斯篇》第二部分的八組推論當中提出一種具有數特徵的存有論，這個存有論綿密、細緻地論說《蒂邁歐篇》裡的宇宙生成論以及「未成書研究」裡的原理論，在這當中，相拯救現象的可能性乃在於---神以其意願與叡智將相形塑於這個數存有的世界並因此使那些在場域裡生滅變化的現象獲得一致性，如此，神的意願（i.e.善）乃作為相得以拯救現象的最具統馭力的原因與原理；關於第二個論題，那能使少年蘇格拉底獲得真理以成為哲學家的訓練，正是那以合理論說所掌握的相為對象的訓練，筆者認為，柏拉圖在這個訓練當中，試圖透過假設法的運用，使得愛智者能緊守在對「是」（i.e.相）的追求上，並得以在一步步的往上探求當中，在最後能以最終的決定性原因---善---來束縛住所有的相，如此，當愛智者能在「善」的指導下以合理論說來正確地指出每個相的真實本質時，這個愛智者也就成為真正的哲學家。 在這樣的解決方式當中，柏拉圖證成了靈魂能夠認知真理的可能性，為自己的真理之路尋得一個合理的立足點。柏拉圖在這當中所奮力搏鬥的，主要並不是亞里士多德在《物理學以後諸篇》A 6.987a33-b10所提及的這些哲學家，而是歷史上的這位伊利亞哲學家---巴曼尼德斯：柏拉圖分離相論的核心來自巴曼尼德斯其毫無生滅變動的「完滿的是」，然而，柏拉圖拯救現象以及保全思考與知識的可能性的這個企圖，卻又是必須對巴曼尼德斯的「完滿的是」提出批判。而在柏拉圖藉由這兩個假設與八組推論來與巴曼尼德斯奮力搏鬥當中，柏拉圖所完成的不僅僅只是解決分離相論所可能引來的困境，而更是走上一條不同於巴曼尼德斯的真理之路，因為現象的拯救是柏拉圖所主要異於巴曼尼德斯的地方，而那使得現象得以被相所拯救的最具統馭力的原因與原理乃在於---宇宙父親的意願與叡智，而這乃作為柏拉圖自己的真理之路的最終磐石。 關鍵詞：相論，分離，分有，善，假設法，柏拉圖，巴曼尼德斯，〈未成書研究〉，《巴曼尼德斯篇》，《蒂邁歐篇》。 / Abstract The aim of this thesis is to show that how Plato might deal with the possibility for soul of knowing the truth. The historical reason for Plato positing the invariable Forms, which are totally apart from the variable sensible things, is remarked by Aristotle that: on the one hand, having been agreed with Cratylus and the Heracllitean doctrines that all sensible things are always in a state of flux and that no science of them exists, yet on the other hand, taking into account the Socrates’ efforts to find general definitions of ethical terms, Plato, having been inspired by both views, thinks that there must be some invariable things, i.e. Forms, which are totally apart from the variable sensible things and could only be thought with logos（or reasonable account）, as the causes of the sensible things. Therefore, the soul could recollect and think of Forms by perceiving these sensible things, which participate in the corresponding Forms. Hence, Plato saves the phenomena and secures the possibility for soul of thinking and knowing the truth by his theory of Forms. However, there might be many problems that arisen from Plato’s theory of Forms. These problems are shown mainly by the three perplexities, which are encountered by the young Socrates in the Parmenides. First, the young Socrates is undecided about whether the base things could have their Forms, second, having been unable to solve the problem of the sharing between the sensible things and Forms, the young Socrates finally has to accept the impossibility of sharing, third, further, just owing to this totally separation that is between the sensible things and Forms, Forms finally could not save the phenomena and could not be known by anyone. Actually, the three perplexities are the two topics of Plato’s way of truth, which is that how the lover of wisdom could know the Forms that are totally separate from the sensible things. The first topic is that, in what way the possibility of thinking and acquiring knowledge could be secured. That is, how the phenomena could be saved by Forms? The second topic is that, in what way the lover of wisdom could acquire the truth and becomes the real philosopher. As for the first, I think that Plato claims a kind of ontology, which has numerical character, in the second part of the Parmenides. This ontology provides deliberately the cosmogony of the Timaeus and the theory of the Principles in the Unwritten Doctrines that could justify the possibility of the phenomena that are saved by Forms. This possibility lies in the god’s nous and will, i.e. the world that has numerical character is fashioned by the god with Forms as model, and then the becoming phenomena that cling to the receptacle are saved and intelligible. Therefore, the god’s will is the supremely valid cause and principle of this possibility. As for the second, this exercise that can make the young Socrates as a real philosopher if he takes it into practice is the training, which takes Forms as its objects and be practiced in hypothetical method. I think the reason for Plato of using the hypothetical method is that this hypothetical method can make the lover of wisdom to cling to Forms when he is putting this exercise into practice, and in this upward process systematically, finally, he can fasten all the Forms with the final cause, i.e. the good. Therefore, when the lover of wisdom could show the real essence of each Form with reasonable account under the guidance of the good, he at that time is a real philosopher. Under this solution, Plato justifies the possibility for soul of knowing the truth, and makes his way of truth possible. In this fighting, those with whom Plato fights are not those philosophers that are remarked by Aristotle in Metaphysics A 6.987a33-b10, but the philosopher of Elea, Parmenides. On the one hand, the key point of Plato’s theory of Forms is coming from Parmenides’ concept of Being, which is ungenerated and imperishable, yet on the other hand, the attempt for the possibility of saving the phenomena and for soul to know the truth is urging Plato to put Parmenides’ claim to the question. Then what Plato has done in this fighting, which mainly occurs in the second part of the Parmenides, is that as he is solving these perplexities, he at the same time is stepping upon another way of truth, which is different from Parmenides. In this fighting, saving phenomena is the main difference between Plato and Parmenides. The god’s nous and will is the supremely valid cause and principle of the saved phenomena and this most supreme cause is the coping-stone for Plato’s way of truth. Keywords: Plato’s theory of Forms, separate, participate, the good, the hypothetical method, Plato, Parmenides, the Unwritten Doctrines, the Parmenides, the Timaeus.

我國財政制度是否具有公平性往往是財政學者們注意的焦點，國內只單獨探討租稅面之文章非常多，而同時考慮整體財政收支制度文章較少，而且所採用的方法幾乎皆是「有效稅率」、「有效受益率」及「有效淨負擔率」。這些指標主要是判定財政制度是累進抑或累退，其較無法直接判定所得分配改善效果。因此本文最主要是透過租稅及公共支出歸宿假設將各類政府財政收支分攤至每一十分位家庭之所得，求出吉尼係數，利用比較吉尼係數大小來判斷我國財政制度是否會改善所得分配。利用18年資料作分析，以幫助我們更進一步地瞭解我國財政收支對所得重分配影響，所得出的結論和國內一些文章比較。首先在只考慮租稅面情況之下：直接稅具有改善所得分配效果，而間接稅反使所得分配更加惡化，整體賦稅制度具有所得重分配效果，但並非很顯著。其次再單獨考慮支出面情況下：首先對耗源性支出做家庭人口數調整，並將支出對家庭所得影響區分為三組，均顯示我國移轉性支出具有所得分配效果，而耗源性支出會使所得分配惡化，正的移轉性支出效果大於耗源性負效果，所以我國公共支出會使所得分配改善。再者，作整體考量，亦即同時探討租稅面與公共支出面之相互影響，其結果說明財政收支會改善所得重分配，而改善效果最主要來自於支出面而非租稅面。 第一章 緒論 第一節 研究動機與目的 第二節 研究方法與期間 第三節 研究限制 第四節 研究架構 第二章 文獻回顧 第一節 國外文獻 第二節 國內文獻 第三章 理論介紹 第一節 吉尼係數的概念 第二節 Suits Index 第三節 Kienzie Index 第四節 本章小結 第四章 實證程序與估計方法 第一節 預算歸宿之概念 第二節 資料來源限制與處理過程 第三節 所得之定義 第四節 租稅與支出分類 第五節 預算歸宿模型 第五章 實證結果與分析 第一節 賦稅制度對所得分配之影響 第二節 公共支出對所得重分配效果之影響 第三節 財政收支制度對所得重分配之影響 第六章 結論與未來發展

對於生存時間的資料而言，通常我們所想要研究瞭解的是，至少存活到某特定時間點的機率，而這個機率亦即生存分析中的生存函數(survival function)。當有兩個不同的母體存在時，為了要知道這兩個母體的生存函數是否相同，在統計方法上，我們將進行一些檢定，常用的有Gehan-Wilcoxon和Cox-Mantel之兩樣本檢定，後來又有修飾型的Kolmogorov-Smirnov檢定。但是，前兩種檢定方法，只對此兩組生存函數呈現某特殊型式時，具有好的檢定力。因此，透過一些實證的研究，將上述檢定方法做有系統的整理，進而發展出一套簡單又有效率的檢定程序。再者，若檢定得此兩個母體之生存函數不相等時，如何利用Bootstrap方法，進一步對兩組生存函數之特定生存機率點或生存時間點所分別對應之生存時間或生存機率差距做推論與比較，本文將有詳細她說明；以提供研究人員更多有效的資訊，不再僅止於檢定虛無假設是否拒絕而已。最後，我們又藉由推廣上述Bootstrap方法，將其運用到檢定方法上，而另外發展出一種新的兩母體生存函數之檢定方法。 / When two different populations exist, we will take some tests by Cehan-Wilcoxon, Cox-Mantel or Modified Kolmogorov- Smirnov in satistical way. Therefore we develope a simple and efficient test process from arranging above test ways system- atically through some real study. How to use Bootstrap way to infer the difference of survival time or survival probability of specular point. We infer Bootstrap way on test work and then develope a new two populations survival function test way.

傷害罪的研究，在我國學說實務上對於特定的議題可能有所分歧，但原則上已然有一定的研究成果與結論，對於身體或是健康的定義，或者是所涵攝的範圍等等。然而隨著社會發展，以及對於個人身體期待有更為完整的保護，除了生理機能上的傷害以外，對於心理、精神、或是情緒上的傷害，是否能夠被劃歸於傷害罪的保護範圍，也應有其討論空間。 本文試圖由保護法益出發，討論心理傷害在身體法益的角度下其存在的可能，如果可能存在，則在現行的條文下應該做如何的解釋。這並不是一個純粹學術的討論，而是一個貼近社會每個個體的議題，每個社會個體在社會中的活動，都可能造成他人心理或是情緒上的不愉快；相反的，也可能因為他人的行為而有心理或情緒上的不愉快。這些事實每天重複的發生在我們周遭，重點在於是否有注意到這些心理傷害存在，以及如何給予心理傷害評價。 肯認心理傷害的概念是存在後，如果要作更細緻的分析，就必須先定義心理傷害的概念，去尋找在哪些情況之下，會成為具有法律意義的心理傷害，而為傷害罪之保護範圍。將其具體化，也就是心理傷害的傷害結果是必須符合一些標準的，如果欠缺標準，則會使心理傷害的概念浮動，而可能過度擴張其範圍，故若該結果欠缺實質的情緒傷害、或是未使被害人的反應非屬正常範圍等，則不認為其為心理傷害，而可能是一種負面的情緒反應而已。 心理傷害因為其本質較為特別，是何種行為導致心理傷害結果的存在，也就是行為與結果之間的因果關係並不甚清楚。其理由在於，在心理傷害的情形，特定行為是否確實造成心理傷害結果並不是客觀明顯可見的，是以一個心理傷害結果的存在，是由A行為或是B行為所導致，或是由A、B數行為一同造成，除非有明確的事實證據可以作為依據，否則因果關係的建立上，都只能透過人類經驗的累積作為參考依據，而無法使用條件理論來作為判斷標準，是以在此情形下，透過人類經驗而建立因果關係的假設因果關係理論，在論理上似乎會是比較實用也比較合理的標準。 在因果關係的確立後，同時必須考量該結果是否可以歸責於行為人，如果該行為在社會上是被允許的，則即使該行為可能有造成他人心理傷害的風險，該風險就應該被容許而會是容許風險。而在社會中因為有親疏程度不同之人際關係，如果人與人之間的關係較為緊密，在社會共識上會提高容許風險的門檻，而擴大容許風險的範圍，在結論上，就會是該行為雖然造成心理傷害結果，但是因為該行為本身帶有傷害結果的風險是社會所已經認識且允許的，是以即使該風險確實實現，社會也不會予以處罰。 關鍵字：傷害、心理傷害、負面情緒、情緒傷害、實質情緒傷害、正常範圍、人類經驗、假設因果關係、容許風險 / The researches of assault and battery may exist difference in specific issues between theories and practice, but in general, the researches have got some results and had conclusions, like the definition of body or health, or the area which assault and battery including. However, due to the developing of the society and the more desire to protect individual body, except the harm to the physical functions, if the harm to mind or emotion could be classified as the range of assault and battery may be worth discussing as well. This thesis tries to start from the legal interest(Rechtgut), to talk about the possibility of mental injury included in the legal interest of body. If the legal interest of body include the mental harm, then how to explain the articles which are currently in effect. This is not a pure academic discuss, but a issue which close to every individual in society. The activities of individuals in society may cause mental or emotional unpleasantness. On the contrary, mental or emotional unpleasantness might be caused by other’s behaviors too. Those facts around us happen repeatedly everyday and the importance is whether we noticed the mental harm exist or not, and how to appraisal it. After confirming the notion of mental harm or injury exist, if try to analyze more detailed, defining the mental harm notion is the first step we should take and looking for under what kind of situations the notion of mental harm will become meaningful in legal system. Specifically, which means the results of mental harm must conform with some standards. If lacking of standards, the notion of mental harm will be vague, and the result of the vagueness, it might broaden the range excessively. So if the results lack of substantial emotional harm, or didn’t make victims’ reactions out of normal range, then we don’t admit the result is a mental harm, but a negative emotion. Because mental harm has special quality, the question is which behavior leads to the results of mental harm, and the causation between behavior and result is not clear enough. The reason is that in the situation of mental harm, if the specific behaviors surly cause the result of mental harm can’t be discovered obviously and objectively. As the result, the existence of a result of mental harm is caused by behavior A or B, or is caused by A and B, except we have clear facts and proofs to be reference materials, or we only can apply the accumulation of human experience to the construction of causation and we can not use condition theory(Bedingunstheorie) as the standard to determine the causation. Thus, the theory of hypothesized causation constructs the causation through the human experience seems more practical and reasonable standard. When the causation have been constructed, after that, the question is that if the defendant should be blamed for the result should be considered as well. If the behavior is allowed in the society, then even if the behavior may bring about the risk of mental harm of the others, but the risk shall be allowed or endured and is an allowable risk(das erlaubte Risiko). And the relationships between people are not always as any others, if the relationship is closer, the common consensus of society will raise the line of allowable risk and broaden the range of allowable risk. In conclusion, although the behavior leads to the result of mental harm, the behavior companies the risk of the result of mental harm is recognized and allowed by society, so even the risk occur in deed, society will not punish the behavior. Key Word: assault, battery, harm, injury, emotional harm, mental harm, emotional injury, substantial emotional harm, normal range, causation, allowable risk

根據環保署統計得知92年平均每人每日垃圾產生量為0.901公斤，該年垃圾總產量約為736萬公噸，清除處理廢棄物的方法，除了過去在各鄉鎮設置垃圾掩埋場，將廢棄物當地掩埋外，還有就是興建垃圾焚化廠來替代垃圾掩埋場，以減少取得垃圾掩埋場用地的困難。雖然傳統的公營、民營的一般掩埋場與衛生掩埋場則逐年減少，但仍高達了千座以上，全台各鄉鎮幾乎皆可看見。 因為垃圾處理設施的存在，令人覺得居家週遭的生活環境不寧適。廢棄物與其他環境介質之聯結有很大的相關性，單純針對廢棄物本身所造成的污染損害進行質損估算，是困難度較高的工作。但是垃圾處理設施本身所造成不寧適感受的損害並不包含在這些相關帳表中，而可以使用損害評估法的方式加以估算表示，因此本研究之目的在於調查垃圾處理設施帶給人們不寧適感受的質損。 此種不寧適的污染損害與賠償並不存在市場交易，無法藉由市場上的供給與需求來反應民眾所遭受的質損，因此本研究採用假設市場價值評估法(contingent valuation method)之問卷的方式，調查民眾願意改善環境品質的願付價值(willingness to pay)與願意接受環境惡化的情況下，願意接受的補償價值(willingness to accept)，民眾的WTP/WTA可視為受損害的環境價值，即為廢棄物處理設施所可能產生的質損。 / The producing amount of the one’s rubbish was 0.901 kilograms every day in 2003 according to the statistics in the Environmental Protection Administration. Total output of rubbish is about 7,360,000 metric tons that year. The method of cleaning the rubbish is building landfills and incinerators in every county. But now it is hard to get the specific land to build landfill, and the government policy is that an incinerator substitute for the all landfills in a county. Though the public and private landfills decrease gradually every year, it still had several thousand landfills in Taiwan. Because of the existence of the rubbish treatment facilities, it always makes the living environment of the surrounding area at home not feel peaceful and lose amenity. The purpose of this research lies in investigating the damage that the rubbish treatment facilities cause non-amenity to people. These kinds of pollution damage and compensation do not exist the market. We can’t use the supply, demand and price in the market to response the non-amenity damage of the feeling of Residents. So our research takes the survey to investigate how much resident would be willing to pay for improving the environment amenity and willing to accept for worsening the environment amenity. The people's WTP/WTA can be regarded as the value of the environmental damage from the rubbish treatment facilities.

在醫療糾紛與日俱增的趨勢下，醫療損害民事責任之研究，無疑是法學研究所必須面對的重要課題。除了在實體法層面上，建構適當的醫療損害賠償歸責體系外，程序法上發展出一套特別適用於醫療訴訟的舉證責任分配規則，對於司法審判實務尤具實益。此一舉證責任分配規則具有適當緩和過失責任與無過失責任爭論之作用，使民事損害賠償法面對醫療糾紛得以發揮功能，進一步正當化醫療傷害去刑化努力，並能減少體制外抗爭上演。 關於醫療行為所生損害賠償責任可概分為：基於「醫療瑕疵行為」與基於「自我決定告知義務違反」兩種類型之損害賠償責任。在一般舉證責任分配的基本原則—規範說之適用下，病患（或家屬）原則上仍必須就「醫療疏失行為」、「受有損害」、「兩者間存在因果關係」等要件負舉證責任，惟鑑於醫療資訊上的高度專業性、證據的構造性偏在情況及醫界組織上的專業自律性，不論在醫療疏失或因果關係之舉證上，病患都遭遇舉證上的困難。因此，有必要在一定條件下，適當修正規範說於醫療訴訟之適用，發展出醫療訴訟之舉證責任分配特別規則，以減輕病患的舉證責任。 就醫療瑕疵類型之舉證責任分配特別規則，實包括以下各種舉證責任減輕之制度：表見證明、民法第二二七條之舉證責任減輕、重大醫療瑕疵之舉證責任減輕、證明妨礙、違反文件義務與診斷報告作成及確保義務之舉證責任減輕、可完全控制危險領域之舉證責任減輕、損害賠償之舉證責任減輕等，及證明度之降低等制度。關此，本論文整理德國及我國學理看法、實務案例，並就上述各項制度逐一詳細討論，俾使讀者瞭解各項舉證責任減輕制度之實際運作功能。 另在「病患自我決定告知義務違反」之類型上，根據目前多數見解，每一個侵害身體完整性的醫療行為，都是構成要件該當的身體侵害，此一侵害本身即表徵出違法性，唯有存在「病患有效的同意」，始得排除之。因此，關於「對病患已善盡告知義務」且「已取得病患之同意」，醫師或醫院則負有舉證責任。關此，本論文乃以「醫師告知」、「病患同意」為主軸，分析「告知後同意」原則所衍生之舉證責任問題。 最後，本論文除了回顧歸納各章節之重要結論外，並再就醫療訴訟上之舉證責任分配規則體系，重新作一建構。

企業因為經濟自由化、貿易國際化潮流之影響，逐漸成為資本集中與技術密集之經營型態。為求擴充生產規模、增加產品種類、分散投資風險、拓展國際市場等目的，因而成立新公司或兼併其他公司，或購買其他公司之股份，或母公司與子公司交叉持股，而形成關係企業之組織型態，已成為普遍趨勢。職是，關係企業之經濟發展與經營模式，已然占有重要之地位。 關係企業具有特殊屬性，舉凡管理組織、生產規劃、人事制度、市場行銷、財務風險、獲利能力、公共事務與社會歸屬，均有相當程度之影響力。我國公司法對於關係企業專章之規範，仍有不足之處，導致受一九九八年亞洲金融風暴影響所及，爆發若干關係企業之經營弊端，其中以股票流通市場之證券交易違法行為，最為嚴重。綜觀其原因，除肇始於東南亞金融危機及國際不景氣環境外，亦顯示關係企業在股票市場存有許多問題，諸如負責人欠缺誠信、掏空公司資產，造成企業發生危機，發生多起上市或上櫃公司之經營弊端，嚴重損害公司、股東權益與債權人利益，並衝擊社會投資人與整體經濟，值得探討研究。 本論文研究方向，以法制理論、比較法學及實證案例為基礎，論述關係企業證券交易之違法行為，以股票流通市場為中心，並闡述近年來若干重要之關係企業案例，分析法院裁判之論處法律邏輯。包括關係企業之市場操縱行為（違約交割、沖洗買賣、相對委託、連續交易炒作行為）、關係企業「護盤」之違法性、關係企業之內線交易行為，等重要項目。亦討論關係企業藉由無形資產之高估或低估而買賣有價證券之非常規交易行為，兼述國際會計準則公報之規範，佐以實際案例研究。此外，亦闡論關係企業財務預測制度與證券交易違法行為之牽連、證券投資人之保護。 本論文內容之參考文獻資料，包括學位論文（例如前輩先進之博碩士論文）、教授學者之著作書籍、著名期刊與國內外網站資訊。所參考資料則以我國與美國法制文獻為主，至於其他國家之部分，則略以要旨參酌。最後，再針對作者執業律師參與關係企業案例之辯護瞭解，提出若干防弊機制之建議，俾供各界參考。 / UNLAWFUL ACTS BY AFFILIATED ENTERPRISES RESPECTING SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS WITH A FOCUS ON THE STOCK EXCHANGE MARKET Abstract Due to the impact of economic liberalization and trade internationalization, operations of enterprises have gradually become capital-intensive and technology-intensive. In order to increase production, expand product line, spread out investment risks, and develop international markets, enterprises have established new companies, merged with others, and purchased shares of other companies, or have engaged in cross-holding of shares between parent companies and subsidiaries. As a result, the formation of affiliated enterprises has become a popular trend. The economic development and business model of affiliated enterprises have likewise become important issues. Affiliated enterprises have their unique attributes; their management organization, production planning, personnel policy, marketing, financial risks, profitability, public affairs, and social affiliation have significant impact on enterprises. Due to inadequacies in the regulations on affiliated enterprises in Taiwan’s Company Law, several affiliated enterprises were exposed to have engaged in fraudulent business operations as a result of the 1998 Asian financial crisis. Among these, most serious were cases involving unlawful securities transactions in the stock market. An analysis of the factors leading to such anomaly shows that in addition to the Southeast Asian financial crisis and international economic slowdown, problems caused by of affiliated enterprises in the stock market, such as integrity and credibility issues on the part of the persons-in-charge and their swindling of company assets, resulted in corporate crises. Many incidents of business malpractices in public or OTC companies occurred, severely undermining the interests of companies, shareholders, and creditors, as well as those of the public investors and the overall economy. All these are worthy of further exploration and study. This paper uses legal theories, comparative jurisprudence, and empirical studies to discuss the unlawful activities in securities transactions by affiliated enterprises. This paper focuses on the stock market to explain the major cases involving affiliated enterprises in recent years and to analyze the legal grounds in the court’s decision on punishment. The cases covered include market manipulation by enterprises, default of securities delivery, wash sales, matched order, manipulation of series of transactions, the unlawfulness of stock market intervention by affiliated enterprises, and insider trading by affiliated enterprises. In addition, this paper discusses the transaction anomalies resulting from overvalue or undervalue of intangible assets by affiliated enterprises. Regulations on the International Accounting Standards gazette are explained and supplemented by actual case studies. In addition, this paper explores the inter-relation between financial forecast systems in affiliated enterprises, unlawful activities in securities transaction, and investor protection. Reference literature used in this paper includes academic dissertations, publications by professors and scholars, periodicals, and information from local and foreign Web sites. Reference materials are based primarily on literature on Taiwan and U.S. laws, supplemented by summary of information from other countries. Finally, recommendations of mechanisms to prevent malpractices are put forward, drawing on the author’s experience as defense lawyer for affiliated enterprises.