過去許多企業，將企業原本擁有的智慧財產（例如：專利、商標、營業祕密…）與企業的其他資產、負債，分離出來，成立智慧財產控股公司，並透過智慧財產供股公司的經營管理，獲取大量的租稅利益。此一租稅規劃工具雖然已引起稽徵機關的注意，但運用得當，仍可為企業創造可觀的利潤。 智慧財產控股公司的設立架構，母公司通常會在低稅率的國家或州，設立一完全控股的子公司，由智慧財產控股公司自行創設、或自母公司繼受智慧財產。智慧財產控股公司授權的對象，可能是母公司、亦可能為不相干的第三人。 智慧財產控股公司的租稅效益，來自智慧財產控股公司通常選在低公司稅率（甚至零稅率）的地區設立，對於權利金收入予以免稅的地區。母公司付給子公司的權利金費用，母公司可作為費用扣除，藉以降低母公司的所得稅。智慧財產控股公司可透過發放股利，或對母公司融資等方式，解決母公司的資金需求。 透過智慧財產控股公司進行租稅規劃，最重要面臨『移轉定價』與『避免濫用租稅協定』，因此智慧財產控股公司進行的關係人交易，不能是純為獲取租稅利益的假交易，必須有商業實質。 / Over the last decade or so, many businesses generating significant revenue from intellectual property such as patents, copyrights, trade names and marks, software and know-how (the IP Assets) have organized intellectual property holding companies (IPHCs) to reduce federal and state taxes while separating valuable IP Assets from other corporate liabilities. Recently, states have started to aggressively challenge this tactic. However, substantial state and federal tax savings can still be realized if IPHCs are organized and operated correctly. The structure of an IPHC is fairly simple. The parent corporation typically creates a corporate subsidiary in a state or in a foreign country where little or no taxes are imposed . IP Assets are created by or transferred to the subsidiary. The subsidiary enters into license agreements under which the parent corporation and non-related corporations agree to pay the IPHC royalties in exchange for an exclusive or non-exclusive right to use the IP Assets. Since most IPHCs are organized in jurisdictions with no income tax, the royalties received by the IPHC are generally tax-free. In addition, the parent corporation that paid the royalty typically can deduct the payment as a deductible expense, thereby reducing the parent's income or franchise tax liability. In some circumstances, IPHCs can make tax-free dividend distributions or loans to the parent corporation. The key issue IPHC should consider is “Transfer Price Issue” and “Anti Treaty Shopping Issue”. Transactions between related parties can’t be shame transaction, business substance is required.

身為一位學習「戰略及國際安全」並從事「野戰戰略」與「中外戰史」研究與教育的軍人，深知唯有堅實的國防武力，才能在中共不放棄以武力解決台灣問題的文攻武嚇下，以「勝兵先勝」之作為，來達到「止戰而不懼戰，備戰而不求戰」，確保「有效嚇阻、防衛固守」戰略構想之達成，然基於深切體認到「兵凶戰危」，不忍國人與大陸之對立紛爭而引發戰火，導致同胞「生靈塗炭」。自當從「避免戰爭」、「防止戰爭」等戰略及國際安全之考量，研究「台海兩岸建立軍事互信機制」，藉由國際間已實施多年的「信心建立措施」（Confidence-Building Measures,以下簡稱CBMs），期能喚起台海兩岸之領導人，本著同根同源，藉展現誠意、溝通、協商、交流，進而建立互信，以降低兩岸緊張情勢，避免因誤判而引發衝突，進而導致戰爭發生。 「信心建立措施」的主要概念，在於透過資訊交換與交流，增加彼此的瞭解，避免雙方因對彼此軍事意圖的誤解，而導致擦槍走火，引發衝突與戰爭。並希望透過「軍事互信機制」等交往原則的確立、軍事行動的規範，以及檢證措施的運用，建立台海兩岸彼此信任之關係，以達到避免戰爭、防止戰爭，確維台海兩岸安全與永久和平之目標。 本論文「台海兩岸建立軍事互信機制之研究」，其主要的理論基礎是參考國際間已施行多年的「信心建立措施」（CBMs），該措施見諸於1975年「赫爾辛基會議」（Helsinki Conference）的「最終議定書」（Final Act）。而在歐洲中立及不結盟國家提議下，至1986年「斯德哥爾摩會議文件」（Document of the Stockholm Conference），第二代的「信心建立措施」被歐洲各國改稱為「信心暨安全建立措施」（Confidence and Security-Building Measures, 以下簡稱CSBMs ）。一般而言，後者較前者更強調軍事意涵的重要性及查證措施的使用，也意味脫離前者的萌芽階段，進入較繁複、具體、強制發展的階段。除歐洲與亞太地區外，非洲、拉丁美洲、中東地區都有相關類似的安排。1991年，南北韓所簽訂的「和解、互不侵犯及交流合作協議」與「朝鮮半島非核聯合宣言」，中共、俄羅斯及其他三個中亞國家於1996年4月26日所簽訂的「關於邊境地區加強軍事領域信任的協定」，均屬於「信心暨安全建立措施」。冷戰結束後成立的「東協區域論壇」及「亞太安全合作理事會」所倡導的安全對話，也是「信心建立措施」的一環。 台海兩岸建立軍事互信機制可採用「信心建立措施」（CBMs）各類作法，即（一）宣示性措施（declaratory measures）、（二）透明性措施（transparency measures）、（三）溝通性措施（communication measures）、（四）海上安全救援措施（maritime measures）、（五）限制性措施（constraint measures）、（六）查（檢）證性措施（verification measures）…等，並參考國際間建立互信之成功案例，區分目前已在執行的公布「國防報告書」、宣布「軍事演習之種類、範圍、時間、地點」、遂行「海上救難行動」、建立「海峽中線共識」…等，並配合國統綱領的進程，再分為近、中、遠程軍事互信作為，逐步建立台海兩岸軍事互信，降低緊張，化解衝突，以避免導發台海間之戰爭，共創台海兩岸中國人之雙嬴。 當前台海兩岸之紛爭，乃導因於雙方領導人及政府之互信不足，故在推動台海兩岸互信機制時，初期階段，須由單方面展現誠意、培養互信，在時機及條件成熟後，則雙方展現誠意、建立互信，當然我方應審慎規劃，並時時觀察，若中共仍抱持傲慢心態，未能遵守相關協定，必要時可以停止各項交流，以免單方面對中共做出過多的讓步，以確保我國家安全與利益。 從研究中可以深切體會，台海兩岸維持和平與穩定，是台海兩岸中國人的共同期盼，也唯有「台海兩岸建立軍事互信機制」，才能避免雙方因誤解、衝突，而刺激中共以武力犯台，或引爆戰爭。故僅提出具體建議，供決策單位及後續研究此一問題者參考： 壹、台海兩岸不可輕啟戰端。 貳、推動兩岸間制度化互信機制。 參、藉助國際友人加強多邊協商促進兩岸交流。 肆、審慎擬定建立軍事互信措施之優先順序。 伍、推動兩岸建立軍事互信立法逐步執行。 陸、賡續研究集思廣益尋求兩岸雙贏策略。 台海兩岸建立軍事互信機制，雖然還有相當多的困難與窒礙，但相信只要台海兩岸領導人有決心，必可早日達成兩德統一與兩韓和解的光明坦途，這也是台海兩岸中國人所衷心期盼的抉擇，但願不久的將來，台海兩岸的中國人，均可走出免於戰爭與殺戮之夢魘，進而同享自由、民主與均富的和平幸福生活，共創台海兩岸的繁榮與發展。

近年因社會經濟產業結構轉變，擇業態度改變，漁船工作具危險性且相較於陸上工作待遇及福利之優勢不再，再加上「少子化」因素，國人從事漁船工作意願低落，外來船員逐漸成為補充漁業勞動力來源，尤其大陸船員語言及文化習慣與國人相近，頗受我國漁船主青睞，惟我國漁船主境外僱用大陸船員陸續所衍生的問題，在漁船主、民間團體及漁政主管機關努力下，終於98年12月22日第四次江陳會談簽署「海峽兩岸漁船船員勞務合作協議」可望獲得解決。 大陸船員引進機制在我國不開放陸勞前提下，維持「境外僱用、境外作業、過境暫置」原則，但就入出國管理角度觀之，大陸船員現行以搭乘兩岸直航客船來臺再搭專車接駁至其他漁港作法，卻與實質入境無異，本研究透過各地區漁船主對大陸船員引進機制意見調查，瞭解漁船主對現行大陸船員引進機制的看法，並藉以提出大陸船員引進機制之建議。 / In the recent years, the industrial structure of social economics has transformed, people’s attitudes of career choice have changed, and the pays and benefits of dangerous works on fishing boats are no longer better than those of works on land. Plus the factor of “low birthrate”, people are not willing to do works on fishing boats in Taiwan. Foreign crew members have graduate become the source of supplementary labors in the fishing industry. Crew members from Mainland China are similar to Taiwanese in the aspects of language and cultural habits. Therefore, they are very preferred by fishing boat owners in Taiwan. However, there have been many issues caused by Taiwanese fishing boat owners hiring crew members from Mainland China. With the efforts put in by fishing boat owners, non-governmental organizations, and fishery management authorities, these issues are expected to be resolved after the “Cross Strait Fishing Boat Crew Affairs Cooperation Agreement” was signed in the Fourth Chen-Chiang Summit on 2009/12/22. Under the premise of not opening up labor from Mainland China, the “offshore employment, offshore operation, and temporary transit arrangement” principle is maintained for the mechanism of Mainland China crew employment. However, in the aspect of entry and exit control, the practice of crew members from Mainland China taking cross-strait direct passenger ships to Taiwan and going to fishing ports by special buses is no difference from actually entering Taiwan. This study explored fishing boat owners’ opinions on the mechanism of employment of Mainland China crew members through surveys to find out their viewpoints and provide suggestions regarding the mechanism of employment of Mainland China crew members.

近年來頻傳科技業高階主管跳槽到競爭對手，而我國於二〇一三年增訂營業秘密的刑事責任，營業秘密的保護與人才流動兩者之間的關係，越來越受到關注，特別是台積電與梁孟松案，智慧財產法院於二〇一二年三月台積電訴梁孟松案假處分裁定採納不可避免揭露原則，在後續的判決中亦論及不可避免揭露原則，使此一原則開始受到國內智慧財產權法實務及學術界之相當關注。 不可避免揭露原則係源自美國法上之司法實踐，本文首先介紹美國法上不可避免揭露原則的理論基礎，透過五個重要判決（Allis-Chalmers v. Continental案、PepsiCo v. Redmond案、Bimbo v. Botticella案、Whyte v. Schlage案和EarthWeb v. Schlack案）介紹不可避免揭露原則的發展，分析不可避免揭露原則的要素，包括兩間公司的競爭程度、營業秘密之認定、員工職務的近似程度、違反誠信的行為和與保密協議、競業禁止條款的關係，並且整理出四種不同的適用類型即完全適用、擴張適用、限縮適用和拒絕適用，繼而以之分析美國各州的適用情形。最後，回歸到我國台積電訴梁孟松案，分析該案是否適合導入或參考美國法之不可避免揭露原則之各項考量因素，並評析法院對於不可避免揭露原則的見解包括採納不可避免揭露原則的適用類型，輔以我國目前實務發展，探討不可避免揭露原則是否應該引入我國，包括是否違反我國法律規定、與美國法制的差異是否影響不可避免揭露原則的適用和價值衡平與政策考量。 / In recent years, hi-tech companies in Taiwan occasionally need to cope with crisis where their executives decide to join competitors’ firms. Along with the 2013 amendment in Trade Secrets Law, which crminizlized trade secrets infringemenet, the relationship between the trade secret protection and job mobility has drew wide attention from IP practitioers and academia. In the case of TSMC v. Liang, the Intellectual Property Court first applied the inevitable disclosure doctrine in an injunction relief. Since the inevitable disclosure doctrine originates from the judicial development of the United States (U.S) trade secret law, the thesis first introduces the basic idea of the inevitable disclosure doctrine in the U.S., and then through five representative cases, including Allis-Calmers v. Continental, PepsiCo v. Redmond, Bimbo v. Botticella, Whyte v. Schlage, and EarthWeb v. Schlack. It then investigates the overall development of the inevitable disclosure doctrine in the U.S.. Based on the case-law development, the thesis further analyzes the essential factors of the inevitable disclosure doctrine incluing the competition between rivals, indentification of trade secrets, job similarity, dishonest act and the relationship with non-disclosure agreement and covenant not to compete. It also catalgorizes four types of judicial application of the inevitable disclosure doctrine, including the original, extended, limited and rejected type. Furthermore, the thesis analyzes the type of application of the inevitable disclosure doctrine in each state in the U.S.. Last but not least, back to TSMC v. Liang, the thesis analyzes if the above-mentioned factors of the inevitable disclosure doctrine fit in the case, and reviews the court ruling about the inevitable disclosure doctrine. In conclusion, based on the current development of judicial practice, the thesis assesses the application of inevitable disclosure doctrine in Trade Secrets Law in Taiwan with the polict goal to balance various interests.

由於中國大陸對企業境內上市的嚴苛要求與外商投資的產業限制，新興互聯網企業不得不訴諸境外上市融資。根據美國會計準則關於「可變利益實體」的規定，新浪網開創以搭建可變利益實體架構實現境外上市的模式成為21世紀初中國大陸互聯網及其他產業上市融資的不二選擇。可變利益實體架構中，境外上市主體與境內運營實體通過協議達成控制關係，將後者營運狀況併入前者財報，滿足其境外上市條件。近年中，支付寶違約、沃爾瑪併購1號店等事件引發法律界、財經界對VIE架構的關注。2015年來，《中華人民共和國外國投資法（草案徵求意見稿）》的公佈，《工業和信息化部關於放開線上資料處理與交易處理業務（經營類電子商務）外資股比限制的通告》（簡稱「工信部196號文」）的公佈，以「暴風科技」為代表的紅籌股回歸現象，都給VIE架構帶來變局。 本文從VIE架構的產生背景出發，梳理其發展狀況，釐清其概念，歸納其特點，分析其所涉法律問題與風險，探討其監管設計，意圖使讀者對中國大陸協議控制下的可變利益實體架構這一法律現象有全面的把握。

金融海嘯提供我們一個深刻的教訓，因為危機前信貸過度增長伴隨著大量的系統風險，最後導致景氣反轉時銀行業龐大損失。而這些損失將動搖整個金融體系，並引發了一連串的惡性循環(Basel Committee on Banking Supervision , BCBS ,2010a, 2010b)；若依循過往個別審慎監理((Microprudential regulation)原則，將無法察覺背後隱藏的系統風險。因此目前趨勢是將以個別(Micro)與總體審慎監理原則(macro)並重，針對能夠影響整體市場金融穩定風險來源而詳加監管，同時透過規範與監理措施適度的降低系統風險，最終達到金融穩定的目的。IMF、BIS以及FSB(2009)針對G20制定的金融機構、市場與工具的指導文件(Guidance to Assess the Systemic Importance of Financial Institutions, Markets and Instruments)中，認為有效控制系統風險是現階段政策監理最重要的主軸之一。所謂系統風險是指能影響金融機構所持有的部位以及對於實體經濟存在嚴重負面影響的風險來源；此總體風險將存在負外部性而非個別審慎監理的風險因子。 因此本文由兩篇宏觀審慎監管框架文章所構成的研究，分別針對市場流動性風險和信用風險的因子。透過非流動性賣權與逆景氣資本緩衝（CCB）買權來分析和評價兩種新的監管框架。第一篇論文的主要概念是討論市場流動性風險因子，雖然當前銀行監管的重點是資金流動性風險，如新巴塞爾協議三 (Basel III)的流動性風險覆蓋率（LCR）和淨穩定資金比率（NSFR），但金融機構實際上也同時面臨資金和市場流動性之間的高度順週期效應，導致流動性螺旋，並威脅到金融穩定。因此，本文提出一個市場流動性，系統性風險和宏觀審慎監理分析框架來填補這一空白。 與Drehmann和Juselius（2013B）的實證研究結果比較，我們發現利用6個月歷史波動度建構的非流動性選擇權是最有效的提前預警指標（EWIS），且符合穩定政策結構和最小監管成本。此外在三個子樣本和嚴重危機時期亦能同樣保持預警的穩健性。因此如果金融機構能透過預警減少金融機構投資種類、行業、交易對手與大額暴險的集中度時，將可以由危機發生後被動式轉變成危機發生前主動式的風險管理，將符合總體審慎監理定義：能影響所有而非單一的金融機構，以及有效控制破壞總體市場產生的系統風險。 在第二篇文章中，我們專注於信用風險監管框架的避險，即Basel III的逆景氣資本緩衝(CCB)。這個新穎的監理視角將鼓勵銀行在危機前的信貸繁榮時期增加資本緩衝，而非在危機後接受援助或者增加昂貴的資本。據美國聯邦存款保險公司（FDIC）統計，2014年第1季全美的存款機構風險加權資產為10.27兆美金；如果最高的逆景氣資本緩衝被應用到這些銀行，將有2570億美金的資本不得不額外注資。因此本文設計了一個新的買權來符合CCB的監管框架，建立提前資本防禦措施來減輕系統性風險和整體銀行業不穩定。首先發現這款買權將能在順境時注入資本，即更低的潛在違約風險與信貸寬鬆時期，進而抵禦未來發生的金融危機。我們的建議也符合Basel III的目標，在危機前2至5年協助銀行取得資本保護。最重要的是，CCB買權可以透過提前取得資本形成一個“減震器”，舒緩隨後而來經濟衰退的壓力達到降低銀行資本順週期性目標；此外還提供了一個對於銀行過度冒險行為的抗衡力量，成為一個“自動穩定器”來達到宏觀審慎監理目標。 / Financial tsunami offered a profound lesson as the pre-crisis excessive credit growth was accompanied by huge systemic risks that ultimately led to the reversal of economy and huge losses of the banking sector. Such losses will shake the entire financial system and trigger a series of vicious cycles (Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, BCBS, 2010a , 2010b ); the hidden systemic risk may not be observed if we follow the previous principles of micro prudential regulation. The guidance formulated by G20 to assess the systemic importance of financial institutions, markets and instruments (IMF, BIS, and FSB, 2009) analyzes that the main issue of prior micro prudential regulation is that every financial institution’s incentive is to manage its own return-risk tradeoff but not necessarily manage the stability for the financial system as a whole. Consequently, the macroprudential regulation focusing on shocks originating outside the financial system can control the negative externalities of systemic risk rather than micro prudential regulation. This dissertation consists of two essays on the macro prudential framework of market liquidity risk and credit risk factor. We introduce, analyze, and value two new regulation frameworks via an illiquidity put option and a CCB call option respectively. The main concept of first essay is to discuss the macro prudential framework of market liquidity risk factor. Although the current banking regulation focuses on systemic funding liquidity risk such as Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) and Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) of Basel III, financial institutions would actually have highly procyclical effects between funding and market liquidity at the same time, leading to liquidity spirals and threatening to financial stability. We therefore propose a market liquidity, systemic risk and macroregulation analysis framework in Taiwan's capital market to fill this gap. Comparison with the Drehmann and Juselius' empirical study (2013b), we find that illiquidity options by using 6-month historical volatility and forecasting short-term stock declines are effective early warning indicators (EWIs) having most stable policy structures and minimal regulation costs. Applying AUC macroregulation criteria, we show this illiquidity measure is also maintained fairly robustness in different intervals, e.g. during three sub-samples and serious crisis periods. If financial institutions can diversify the concentration of portfolios varieties, industries, and counterparty before crises by using EWIs, the passive risk taking can be converted into the active risk management. It is necessary to prepare the market liquidity and macroregulation framework in advance. In the second essay, we focus the hedging product for credit risk factors, i.e. countercyclical capital buffer (CCB). This purpose of countercyclical capital buffer standards is to encourage banks to increase capital buffers in credit good times that can be used in the future stress. According to Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the risk-weighted assets of U.S. depository institutions were $10.27trillion dollars in 2014:Q1. If the maximum CCB is applied to these banks, an additional US$257 billion of equity capital will have to be raised. Hence, we design a new option to establish the capital defenses meeting CCB framework and then mitigating systemic risk and banking instability in advance. We show this product injects capital in good times i.e., lower credit risk and more credit expansion, to weather the future financial crisis. Our proposal also complies with the goal of Basel III to obtain capital in 2 to 5 years prior to crises. Most importantly, the CCB option can provide protection with additional capital to act as a "shock absorber" reducing a procyclicality problem in the subsequent downturn. Besides, this type of option also offers a countervailing force to excessive risk-taking behaviors to act as an "automatic stabilizer" for reaching macroprudential goals.

為維護海上人命、船舶及財產安全，各國均依「1982年聯合國海洋法公約」規定，建立區域搜救合作機制，並參考相關國際公約及搜救作業手冊，規範海上航行安全及緊急事故處理程序，惟因各國地理、水文及氣候不同，執行航行安全維護能力有限，皆必須透過多邊或雙邊搜救合作，強化區域航行安全，藉由搜救交流、兵棋推演或聯合演習等方式，提升彼此搜救合作默契及技能，以保障海上航行安全。 臺灣海峽自古以來即為東亞重要航道，兩岸航運亦自1987年開放兩岸探親，2001年金馬小三通，直至2008年正式海、空運直航以來，臺灣與大陸人民往來逐漸到達頂峰，而海難事故發生頻率亦不斷提高，藉此搜救合作契機在此為氛圍下形成，並在簽署「海峽兩岸海運協議」基礎上，透過輪流舉辦演練、搜救交流互訪及建立緊急聯繫管道等工作，逐步建立兩岸海上搜救合作機制，以「就近就便、及時救援」之原則，共同合作展現兩岸「人道救援」之普世價值。 在兩岸海上搜救合作機制下，兩岸搜救機關不斷共同執行海上搜救合作，增進彼此合作默契與搜救技能，但在兩岸分治的政治現實下，合作機制僅能透過民間團體的協助逐漸常態化，卻未能明文制度化，且隨著政治環境的轉變，搜救合作機制似有停頓，但海峽海域環境依然惡劣，往來人民持續熱絡，因此，為維護海峽航行安全，兩岸搜救機關仍應持續努力，共同完善合作機制，以確保兩岸人民生命財產安全。 / For the sake of maintaining people’s safety and property at sea, every coastal State establish the regional search and rescue (hereinafter SAR) cooperation mechanism in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982, and formulate the navigation safety rules and standard operation procedure of responding to the emergency cases at sea. Due to the discrepancy of geography, hydrology and climate as well as limited ability for maintaining the navigation safety among counties, every state shall enhance the regional navigational safety by lateral or multilateral cooperation in SAR exchange, table-top exercise and joint SAR drill to strengthen the SAR cooperation mechanism and technique in order to provide the safe environment for navigation. Taiwan Strait is the pivotal shipping route of Eastern Asia through the ages. The shipping of the cross-strait starts from visit relatives between both sides in 1987, and gradually increases after the transport links between the Kinmen, Matsu areas and the Mainland area in 2001. The air and sea transport between Taiwan and Mainland area begin in 2008, and the number of Taiwanese and Chinese travel between Taiwan and Mainland reaches the highest record which leads to the increasing disasters at sea. In order to respond to this situation, the cooperation between the cross-strait are needed and the SAR drills are held in turns and officials’ visiting as well as emergency communication channel in accordance with the Cross-Strait shipment agreement which came into effect in 2008. Those measures concrete the SAR cooperation mechanism of the cross-strait on the basis of saving life and property at sea promptly when one side is close or ready for it and demonstrate the common vision of humanitarian rescue. According to the cross-strait’s SAR cooperation mechanism, the rescue authorities of both sides conduct the SAR mutually to enhance the coordination and SAR skills for their work. However, due to the politic relationship of the cross strait, the cooperation is under the non-official channel. Since the political change with the new government in Taiwan, the cooperation between Taiwan and Mainland China is suspended. The Taiwan Strait is a high risk area for people of both sides. Furthermore, in order to provide the safe navigational area, the cross-strait SAR authorities shall continuously establish the cooperative mechanism to maintain the people’s safety and their property.

傳統的國家安全威脅之應處，係以確保國家軍事、政治及外交衝突等國家安全問題為目標。隨著冷戰結束後，全球化時代來臨，國際戰略環境的變遷與威脅性質的演變，「非傳統安全」威脅已逐漸取代「傳統安全」威脅。換言之，傳統安全思維僅著重在主權國家的軍事安全層面，非傳統安全則是基於整體人類安全的考量。我國在面對非傳統安全威脅下，如何調整適應環境之變化，以確保生存及發展，已成為當前刻不容緩之要務。 非傳統安全議題相當廣泛，主要包括：經濟及金融安全、自然生態環境安全、網路資訊安全、大規模殺傷性武器擴散、疫情傳播、恐怖主義、跨境犯罪、走私販毒、非法移民、海盜、洗錢等。中國大陸對臺威脅亦包含傳統與非傳統安全威脅性質。傳統安全係以軍事戰略威脅為主，非傳統安全威脅則來源多元、形式多樣，所呈現以走私、海盜、偷渡、偽造貨幣、詐欺、洗錢等跨境犯罪最為顯著， 本論文將探討兩岸共同打擊跨境犯罪背景發展，並分析兩岸交流衍生之大陸民眾非法來臺所呈現之態樣與現況，闡明我國所面臨的非傳統安全威脅，希冀由相關資料分析比較，藉此驗證現行實務面執行運作成效，並針對實務運作所面臨之困境提出研究建議，供相關單位參考，建立一個兩岸和平安全的互動環境。 / The aim of dealing with the traditional threats to national security is to ensure the national security in the aspects of military, politics and diplomacy. After the end of the Cold War comes the era of globalization, international strategic environment changes as well as the substantial of threat evolves. As a result, “non-traditional security (NTS)” threats have gradually taken the place of “traditional security” treats. In other words, the concept of traditional security only focuses on the aspects of military security of a sovereign state, whereas the consideration of non-traditional security is based on the general human safety. While confronting with threats of non-traditional security, it’s crunch time to make adjustments and adaptation so as to ensure existence and development of Taiwan. The issues of non-traditional security are extremely wide-ranging, mainly including: economic and financial security, ecological and environmental security, information and network security, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the spread of epidemics, terrorism, transnational crime, narcotics and smuggling, illegal immigration, piracy, money laundering, and so on. The threats to Taiwan from China include traditional security threats and non-traditional security threats. The main threat of the traditional threats is military hostility, while non-traditional security threats stem from various sources and come out in multitudinous forms, especially in the fields of transnational crime such as smuggling, piracy, stowaways, currency counterfeiting, fraud, money laundering, etc. This study discusses the background and context of the cross-strait joint fight against transnational crime, and analyzes the current situation and patterns of illegal immigration of the people from Mainland China resulting from the cross-trait exchanges, as well as explicates the non-traditional security threats confronted by Taiwan, whereupon, in the hope of examining the practice performance by means of comparative analysis of related materials, proposed suggestions and strategies for these predicaments are finally concluded as a reference to the competent authorities to build a peaceful and secure environment for cross-strait interactions accordingly.

不論是反全球化或是支持全球化，我們都無法否認，全球化已經是一個現在進行式。另外一個與全球化一樣逐步成長的乃是市場經濟體制，市場經濟體制植基於開放競爭有助於資源合理分配的觀念，而全球化則擴大了資源分配的範圍。然而，全球化和市場經濟體制的發達，貿易壁壘的消除，也帶動跨國界限制競爭活動的發展，反托拉斯不再是單純的國內問題，而是國際問題。 國際反托拉斯所帶來的問題大致可分為下述兩種，一是阻礙國際貿易的發展，二是因為各國不同的反托拉斯標準造成國際緊張以及企業成本。第一類問題可以細分為下述幾種情況：1. 國際卡特爾破壞市場競爭機制以及消費者福祉； 2. 跨國公司在全球濫用獨占力，影響國際競爭秩序和消費者福祉；3. 競爭法的缺乏以及競爭法的不力執行構成市場進入障礙。第二類問題亦可以細分為下屬幾種情況：1. 國際合併的多國標準造成企業的額外成本，不利國際合併之進行，並造成國際緊張；2. 國與國間產業政策以及競爭政策的衝突。 面對上述這些跨國性的反托拉斯問題，各界紛紛提出競爭法調和的呼籲，此議題近來在各國際組織也漸獲重視。事實上為了處理國外限制競爭行為對國內所產生的影響，以保護本國利益，國內法方面已有所謂的「域外適用（extraterritorial application）」對策產生。但是競爭法的域外適用並無法全然解決現時國際限制競爭行為所帶來的問題，反而還帶來了新的問題，並造成國際緊張。為了在國際案件有效執行反托拉斯法，不論是在卡特爾案件或是獨占力濫用案件，各國競爭法主管機關互相合作與協調都是不可或缺的。至於將競爭法提升至國際法層次，避免國家以非關稅措施破壞自由貿易制度，似乎也有需要。 本文目的在於藉著對競爭法調和現況的瞭解和其成就之分析來尋求目前全球化時代，貿易自由化時代下跨國限制競爭問題的解決之道。 全文一共分為六章，第一章為緒論，為本論文做出開端，闡明全球化時代國際競爭秩序的問題，並提出研究範圍與目的。 第二章研究關於國際競爭秩序的雙邊條約，著眼於美國和歐盟，澳洲和紐西蘭，以及我國和世界各國所訂立的條約。討論範圍為該些雙邊關係所建立之合作內容，其具體成效，成功失敗之因素，以及可供世界各國借鏡之處。台灣部分則著眼於我國目前現狀之檢討，和未來走向之研究。 第三章為從事競爭法調和的區域性國際組織，研究範圍包括歐盟、APEC以及NAFTA。其中APEC所從事的活動較近於政策性的調和，屬於競爭政策的宣導；NAFTA則進一步具有競爭法的實體規範；歐盟不但具有實體規範，並具有一套全球獨步的競爭法執行架構。 第四章為國際組織，將討論UN, WTO和OECD在國際競爭法的發展。UN基本上雖為政治組織，但是對於競爭議題也相當重視；WTO部分則將討論目前競爭議題在WTO體系的進展，並進一步討論WTO進行國際競爭法調和工作的可行性和不可行性；OECD對於競爭議題也一直相當重視，本文將探討OECD在競爭議題方面的研究成果。 第五章為全球性的競爭法規範，討論的範圍有UNCTAD所提出的「管制限制性商業行為的一套多邊協議的公平原則和規則（Set of Multilaterally Agreed Equitable Principles and Rules for the Control of Restrictive Business Practices）」以及DIAC。這兩套全球性的競爭法不但都具有實體規範也都提出一套制度性規範，雖然兩者都未能成為具有拘束力的國際競爭法，但是其所提出的實體規範內容和架構設計仍值得我們做進一步的研究。「管制限制性商業行為的一套多邊協議的公平原則和規則」本身是以聯大決議的形式呈現，因此在某一角度而言，「管制限制性商業行為的一套多邊協議的公平原則和規則」並未失敗，然而DIAC原本乃是預定成為WTO的附件之一，唯最後這樣的理想並未實現，因此我們有必要去問，DIAC的失敗因素為何？是基於其實體內容的設計問題，或是制度面的設計問題？或者是因為其他的外在因素？ 最後，在第六章的結論，本文將試圖分析各種競爭法調和方式的利弊得失，並且提出建議。 / Some people oppose globalization, while others support globalization. However, it is undeniable that globalization is an on-going trend. Another on-going trend is market-oriented economy structure. The structure of market-oriented economy bases on the theory that competition contributes to reasonable allocation of resource. On the other hand, globalization expands the scope of the allocation of resources. However, the proliferation of globalization and the structure of market-oriented economy and the elimination of trade barriers also promote the development of transnational anticompetitive activities. Antitrust is no more a pure domestic issue, it is also an international issue nowadays. International antitrust problems could be divided into two parts. First, the international antitrust activities hinder the development of international trade. Second, different antitrust standards of each country cause international tense situation and increase enterprises’ cost. First situation contains following aspects: 1. International cartels ruin market competition system and welfare of consumers. 2. Transnational companies abuse their dominant power all globally and affect international competition order and consumers’ welfare. 3. Absence of competition law and unenforcement of it constitute market entrance obstacles. Second situation also contains following aspects: 1.Different standards of international mergers bring many results, such as increasing enterprises’ extra cost, hindering the proceedings of international mergers, and causing international tensions. 2. The conflict between industry policy and competition policy of countries. Facing those transnational antitrust problems, the issue of the harmonization of competition law has been raised. This issue is drawing more and more attention in several international organizations day by day. In fact, to deal with the domestic effect of abroad anticompetitive activities to protect national interest, the theory “extraterritorial application” of domestic law has been raised. However, the extraterritorial application of domestic law is unable to solve all the problems that the international anticompetitive activities have brought. Furthermore, it has also made new problems and caused international tensions. To enforce antitrust law effectively in international cases, cooperation and coordination between national competition agencies are unavoidable. In addition, bringing antitrust law up to international law level and avoiding nations ruin free trade system by non-tariff strategy seem also be needed. The main purpose of this essay is to understand and analysis the current situation of the harmonization of competition law and to find out the solution of transnational competition problems in the era of globalization and the era of free-trade. This essay has been divided into 6 chapters. The first chapter is the introduction, which illustrates the international competition problems in the era of globalization and brings out the studying scope and purpose of this essay. The second chapter talks about international competition bilateral treaties between U.S. and E.U., Australia and New Zealand, Taiwan and other countries. The discussing scope contains the cooperation content which was set up by the bilateral treaty, its concrete result, and the reasons of its failure or success. As for Taiwan, this essay focuses on the review of its current situation and where its future is. The third chapter talks about regional international organizations which involve in the harmonization of competition law, such as E.U., APEC and NAFTA. APEC’s activities are more closer to the harmonization of policies, which promote competition activities. NAFTA has substantial competition regulations. E.U. not only has substantial regulations but also has the first set of enforcement system of international competition law in the world. The forth chapter is international organization, which talks about the development of international competition law in U.N., WTO and OECD. Although basically U.N. is a political organization, it also highly emphasizes competition issues. In addition, this chapter talks about the development of competition issues in the WTO system and the possibilities of promoting the harmonization of international competition law in WTO. Additionally, OECD also emphasizes competition issues very much. This chapter also talks about the study result of OECD in the competition issues. The fifth chapter is the global competition regulations, which contains “Set of Multilaterally Agreed Equitable Principles and Rules for the Control of Restrictive Business Practices” of UNCTAD and “ Draft International Antitrust Code”. Both of the global competition laws contain substantial regulations and the design of enforcement systems. Although both of them ended up in unrestrictive regulations, they also deserve further research. “Set of Multilaterally Agreed Equitable Principles and Rules for the Control of Restrictive Business Practices” was brought out with the form of UN General Assembly Resolution, but it is successful in some aspect. DIAC was meant to be an Annex of WTO originally. However this idea was not realized at the end. Why DIAC failed? Was it because of the design of its substantial content or the design of the enforcement structure or other outside factors? At last, this essay will analysis the shortages and advantages of all kinds of the harmonization of competition law and bring out recommendations in the conclusion of chapter 6.

日本企業の職場において個別化された仕事・労働条件決定のルールの構造を記述するフレーム、そして青木昌彦が展開した組織アーキテクチュアとコーポレートガバナンスの分析枠組みを労使関係・労働組合機能の分析に活用できるよう詳細化したフレームを提起し、企業別労働組合が個別化する労働条件決定における合意形成に向けてどのような役割を果たしているのかを賃金制度の労使協議・労働時間決定・経営参加の事例を展開した上で明らかにした。 / 博士(産業関係学) / Doctor of Philosophy in Industrial Relations / 同志社大学 / Doshisha University