在國內外陸續爆發財務報表舞弊案件(如安隆、博達等)後，我國主管機關透過增修各項規範(如會計師法、上市上櫃公司治理實務守則等)以及準強制性會計師輪調的實施，加強會計師的法律責任與獨立性，期許能確保會計師的審計品質，並保障投資人的權益，維護資本市場的健全。 在文獻回顧中發現，會計師的任期對審計品質的影響，目前尚未有較一致的看法；有學者主張強制性會計師輪調下，繼任會計師需付出較高的審計初始成本，且因對產業及公司之不熟悉，導致繼任會計師於審計初始任期時，審計品質反而較前任會計師低落。我國遭受懲戒會計師之審計品質較未受懲戒會計師低，但會計師遭受停業懲戒後，繼任會計師並未能對審計品質有所改善。本研究欲探討企業歷經會計師遭受停業而被迫必須予以更換下，繼任會計師在更換初期及擔任較長任期後的審計品質，相較原任會計師的審計品質是否有差異。 本研究以裁決性應計數報導幅度作為衡量審計品質的代理變數，參考相關文獻建立研究模型，並以台灣金管會證期局於民國96年公佈之近5年會計師懲戒名單為基準樣本，找出受懲戒會計師之客戶公司為觀察樣本，分析當企業因原任會計師受懲戒被停業或除名而必須更換會計師時，繼任會計師是否能改善原任會計師較差的審計品質，結果並未能發現繼任會計師審計品質相較原任會計師有顯著改善的證據。本研究進一步分析所內繼任會計師(相對初始成本較低、但獨立性亦較低)及所外繼任會計師(相對初始成本較高、但獨立性亦較高)間，審計品質改善是否有所差異，結果未能發現兩者有顯著的差異。 / From USA to Taiwan, lots of financial scandals have disheartened investors in recent years. For the purpose of improving audit quality of financial reports and protecting interests of the investing public, regulators in Taiwan instituted new rules and implemented a “quasi-forced CPA rotation system” to enhance auditors’ legal responsibility and independence. In literature review, findings about the relationship between auditor tenure and audit quality are not all consistent. Under forced CPA rotation, because of the necessary higher start-up cost and unfamiliarity of client business, succeeding auditor’s audit quality is often lower than the predecessor. Prior studies find the audit quality of sanctioned CPAs to be lower than those not sanctioned, and their succeeding auditors who replace CPAs whose licenses’ are suspended can not improve the audit quality significantly. The purpose of this study is to investigate the difference between the audit quality of predecessor CPAS, who are under temporary suspension of license and that of their successor auditors both at the initial stage of the change several years afterwards. ABSDA is the proxy of audit quality in this study, and a model based on literature to date is developed. This study uses the CPA sanction cases posted on the website of the Securities and Futures Bureau (SFB). The client firms whose CPAs were sanctioned by regulatory authorities during the part five years are taken as samples in the research. The empirical tests find that succeeding CPAs can’t significantly improve the audit quality subsequent to the change. Moreover, the study tests if the succeeding CPAs from the same firm of the predecessor CPA can make greater improvement on audit quality than succeeding CPAs from another firm can. The findings show no significant difference between those two either.