本論文主要是介紹並評估一個R的軟體套件叫做"rBeta2009"。此套件是由Cheng et al. (2012) [8] 所設計，其目的是用來產生貝他分配(Beta Distribution)及狄氏分配(Dirichlet Distribution)的亂數。本論文特別針對此套件之(i)有效性(effiniency)、(ii)精確性(accuracy)及(iii)隨機性(randomness)進行評估，並與現有的R套件作比較。此外，本論文也介紹如何應用此套件來產生(i)反貝他分配(Inverted Beta Distribution)、(ii)反狄氏分配(Inverted Dirichlet Distribution)、(iii)Liouville分配及(iv)凸面區域上的均勻分配之亂數。 / A package in R called "rBeta2009", originally designed by Cheng et al. (2012) [6], was introduced and evaluated in this thesis. The purpose of the package is generating beta random numbers and Dirichlet random vectors. In this paper, we not only evaluated (i) the efficiency, (ii) the accuracy and (iii) the randomness, but also compare it with other R packages currently in use. In addition, it was also scrutinized in this thesis how to generate (i) inverted beta random numbers, (ii) inverted Dirichlet random vectors, (iii) Liouville random vectors, and (iv) uniform random vectors over convex polyhedron by using the same package.

學校應該學習與組織記憶、組織學習以及體制論相關之知識。其中，組織記憶有助於問題解決與決策制訂（Hanson, 2001），且能協助學校維持不易被模仿、獨特的競爭優勢，並能有效提高組織績效表現及降低成本（Wexler, 2002）。許多組織記憶相關的研究結論顯示，組織成員流動會嚴重影響組織記憶成長（Carley, 1992）。因此，如何有效獲取、保留、維護及存取（retrieve）組織成員的知識，以避免重要的組織記憶消失（Walsh 和 Ungson, 1991;），儼然成為當前組織最需要關切的課題之一（Lahaie, 2005）。本研究整理、分析組織記憶相關文獻，發現藉由中介變項：書面化程度、可接近性、資深知識者角色行為、協同教學行為與知識分享行為以管理組織記憶，可滿足教師的組織記憶存取需求（retrieval demands），維持組織記憶的有效性。 本研究透過問卷調查法，以幼稚園組織中在園年資一年以下與三年以上的教師為研究對象，徵詢教師對組織記憶的存取需求、組織記憶有效性及教師績效知覺三構面的實際感受。總共發出問卷470份，問卷回收率為44.7%，在剔除不適合的問卷後，得到私幼有效樣本161份、公幼有效樣本19份。由於公幼樣本過少，故公幼教師的意見以描述統計方式呈現；私幼樣本則進行組間差異分析、相關分析及迴歸分析，並進行研究假設檢定。 　　研究結果顯示，本研究七項假設皆獲得支持，即幼稚園教師確實具有組織記憶存取需求，且教師在遭遇工作上的困難時，也經常採取實際詢問行為以解決其組織記憶存取需求，且93%的受訪教師認為其獲得的組織記憶具有效性。其次，教師的在園年資與幼教年資愈短，對組織記憶存取需求則愈高。 在中介變項的分析上，受訪教師除了對協同教學行為此變項持有不同認知外，均認為書面化程度、可接近性、資深知識者角色行為與知識分享行為皆有助於組織記憶建構。迴歸分析結果也顯示，無論教師年資之長短，以園長或資深教師擔任諮詢輔導角色，最能維繫組織記憶有效性，也能提升教師績效知覺；其次，增加知識分享行為亦可達到類似結果。故幼稚園組織在處理組織記憶問題時，應讓園長或資深教師擔任資深知識者的角色，並建立教師之間知識分享的機制，讓教師能有效獲取、保留、維護及存取組織記憶，進而促進組織學習、建立競爭優勢並提高教師績效表現。 / Hanson(2001) declared that schools should get insights from the literature regarding organizational memory, organizational learning and institutional theory. Organizational memory can support organizational members to acquire knowledge in problem-solving and decision-making activities (Walsh and Ungson, 1991). Moreover, organizational memory could be viewed as an intangible asset if successfully managed, and it might confer competitive advantages and lower transaction cost (Wexler, 2002). Day (1994) claimed that organizational memory is as a repository for collective memory which lain in policies, procedures, routines, and rules that can be retrieved when organization members needed. Stein and Zwass (1995) defined that organizational memory as “the means by which knowledge from the past is brought to bear present activities, thus resulting in higher or lower levels of organizational effectiveness.” Levitt and March(1996) also mentioned that “the lesson of history are likely to be lost through turnover of personnel (Hanson, 2001).” These statements implied that personnel turnover is the main threat of organizational memory (Stein and Zwass, 1995). This study wants to explore the relationship between teachers’ turnover, retrieval demands and effectiveness of organizational memory and the performance of kindergartens. Moreover, researcher wants to investigate the elements that have the most influence upon organizational memory effectiveness. Drawn from organization memory literature, we found that knowledge externalization, accessibility of organizational memory, senior teachers and principal’s behavior, team-teaching behavior, and knowledge-sharing behavior are determinants of organizational memory effectiveness. / The major finding was that teachers definitely have retrieval demands toward organizational memory, especially new-employed teachers. New teachers need senior teachers and principal’s guidance to help them solve problems and make decisions. The more assistances senior teachers and principal can offer, new teachers are more satisfied with organizational memory. That means new teachers can retrieve organizational memory successfully; moreover, they will be more contented with organizational memory effectiveness and show higher personal performance. As for intervening variables, researcher have detected that senior teachers and principal’s behavior and knowledge-sharing behavior show the primary influence upon organizational memory effectiveness. Consequently, management teams of kindergartens should attempt to create opportunities for teachers to share their knowledge. After knowledge-sharing procedure, teachers’ retrieval demands of organizational memory will be fulfilled, effectiveness of organizational memory will be maintained, and personal performance will be lifted as well.

民國47年7月10日，商樵先生於《稅務》雜誌上發表〈論課稅命令之確定力〉一文，一開頭即提出一項懸宕百年來之問題：「稽徵機關之課稅命令有無確定力？如有，原課稅命令是否可予變更？在何種情形下始可變更？」此問題直至民國65年制定稅捐稽徵法時，仍未獲得解決。蓋當時立法者似乎對課稅處分存續力仍無認識。 立法者真正認識課稅處分存續力之存在，應係在行政程序法制定後。蓋該法第117條以下規定係專為排除存續力規定。惟該法第117條以下規定僅適用於終局性行政處分。換言之，亦僅適用於終局性課稅處分，即未經法令或稽徵機關添加具有暫時性特徵附款之課稅處分。所謂具有暫時性特徵之附款，主要係指調查保留與暫時性而言。具有暫時性特徵附款之課稅處分，因實質存續力之發生受到限制，故不須法律授權，即可由稽徵機關依職權撤銷。反之，不具有暫時性特徵附款之課稅處分，因實質存續力已發生，故稽徵機關原則上即不得撤銷，除非另有法律授權撤銷之依據，始能再次突破實質存續力之限制，而依職權撤銷之。 原則上，撤銷終局性課稅處分須符合以下之一般職權撤銷要件，即：㈠核課期間未屆滿。㈡實質存續力。㈢違法性。㈣無一般失權事由。其次，課稅處分之撤銷範圍，受爭點更正影響，須依違法瑕疵之類型及違法瑕疵在規制上之影響範圍而定。另外，無稅處分屬於授益處分，撤銷無稅處分，自須依授益處分撤銷規定為之。惟撤銷屬於負擔處分之狹義課稅處分，並重為更不利納稅義務人之狹義課稅處分，是否亦須依授益處分撤銷規定為之，即有疑義，而需要妥適解決。

現今世界的經濟自由化、金融自由化及國際化潮流，為世界經濟注入一泉活水。然而，人們卻也為這種高度流動性以及蓬勃的經濟成長付出了慘痛代價。金融危機對經濟的影響與重要性，以及對金融業尤其是銀行有著極其深遠的影響。而關係著銀行經營之成敗，也是銀行業務中最重要的授信政策，毫無疑問更是金融銀行業經營的重心、開發各項業務的基礎。因此，如何在金融危機發生時維持良好的授信品質，成為銀行業不可或缺的首要課題之一。 本文利用文獻分析、問卷設計之量化研究、深度訪談之質化研究等方法來分析「金融危機下，銀行如何透過授信政策來改善授信品質」、「以合作金庫為例，合庫採取哪些授信政策來改善授信品質」以及「合作金庫之授信政策，是否能有效改善授信品質」等研究問題，並以合作金庫在全球金融危機(2007-2009年)下，授信政策的有效性進行探討。 本文研究發現，合作金庫在全球金融危機(2007-2009年)之授信政策，以「協助經營艱困企業的紓困政策」最為有效，「風險控管」、「區域授信中心」等其他相關政策也頗具效果，惟「緊縮性放款政策」的成效不彰。研究也發現，授信政策有效性會受到地區性、年資與職稱的影響而有不同的結果。且全球金融危機(2007-2009年)政策的制定深深受到亞洲金融危機(1997-1998年)政策成效與評價的影響。因此本文有以下幾項建議： 一、 有關當局可記取前幾次金融危機的教訓，作為制定授信政策的參考依據，並將政策方向指向改善金融體系或銀行的體質。 二、 銀行與企業經營要良性循環、共體時艱且合作並存。 三、 在考量政策實行的同時，也須以不同地區、年資與職稱的授信員工託付不同性質的授信政策去執行，才能「因地制宜、適才適用」。 / Nowadays, the rise of liberalization of world economic, financial and international trend plays the role of pouring living water into the world economy. However, people suffer from the exorbitant cost caused by the high liquidity and robust economic growth simultaneously. The significance and impact of global financial crisis, especially on financial and banking activities is absolutely crucial. Moreover, credit policies not only determine success or failure in banking, but undoubtedly is the core of financial management as well as the foundation of banking affair. Therefore, maintaining high credit quality under financial crisis has become the most essential issue for the banking system. In this thesis, literature analysis, quantitative questionnaire design and qualitative in-depth interview have been applied to analyze the following questions including “How do banks improve credit quality through credit policies facing financial crisis ?” ,“In the case of Taiwan Cooperative Bank, what kind of credit policies has it adopted to improve credit quality ?”Are these credit policies of Taiwan Cooperative Bank feasible and sufficient to improve credit quality? ”Also, the effectiveness of credit policies of Taiwan Cooperative Bank during global financial crisis (2007-2009) will be discussed. This study discovers that the most effective credit policy of Taiwan Cooperative Bank during global financial crisis (2007-2009) is “The bailout and assistance policies for the tough enterprises”. ”Risk management policy”, “Regional credit center policy” and other relevant policies are also quite effective. On the contrary, “Shrinking and restricting lending policies” proved to be invalid. The research tells us that the effectiveness of credit policies differs from distinct regions, years of seniority, and agent titles. In addition, the policies during global financial crisis (2007-2009) have been deeply influenced by the evaluation of effectiveness during Asian financial crisis (1997-1998). In conclusion, several suggestions are provided. First, the authorities concerned should keep the lessons from previous financial crisis in mind as references for improving credit quality. And the policy-making direction should be oriented to ameliorate the constitution of banking and financial system. Second, banks and connecting enterprises should operate a virtuous circle, cooperate and coexist in difficulties. Third, in consideration of policy implementation, different regions, years of seniority, and agent titles should entrust diverted credit policies to put into practice. In this way, crediting policies can “ Take actions that suit local circumstances and let the right men do the right things.”

本研究以2007年至2011年中國滬深交易所A股上市公司為研究樣本，以中國證監會公佈之行政裁罰、深滬兩交易所對上市公司之處分、及企業自行揭露的內部控制評價報告之內容分析企業發生內控缺失之類型，依照中國《企業內部控制基本規範》，將內部控制缺失依內控五大要素與五大目標予以分類彙總。並將企業的投資效率分為投資不足與過度投資，分別探討內部控制有效性對公司投資效率之影響。 實證結果顯示投資不足的程度與可靠的財務報導之內控目標的內控缺失存在正向的顯著關係。而過度投資的程度與是否發生內控缺失、後勤支援活動和內控設計及執行的內控缺失類型、內控五大要素、及營運的效率效果之內控目標的內控缺失呈現顯著或單尾顯著的負向關係。整體而言，在被監管單位揭發內控缺失資訊，內控有效性較低，而自我揭露愈多內控資訊，企業內控意識可能較佳之假設下，內控缺失一定程度影響企業的投資決策，內控的有效性有助於投資效率。 / Based on the sample of A-share listed companies in China over the period of 2007-2011, the research classified the companies by under investment and over investment, and investigated the impact of internal control efficiency on firm investment effectiveness separately The study comprehensively collects internal control reports released by listed firms and collects penalties which are released by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC), the Shanghai Stock Exchange (SSE) and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange (SZSE). A further classification of internal control weaknesses was performed based on the nature of the events, COSO Internal Control — Integrated Framework and regulations of internal control in China. 　　In sum, the empirical results indicate that, for the companies under investment, the internal control weaknesses of financial reporting have significant positive impact on firm investment effectiveness. On the other hand for the companies which were over investment, those with internal control weaknesses have significant negative association with investment effectiveness. Moreover, the results show that companies with defective of logistics work or the design and execution of internal control were worse performers on investment effectiveness. Based on the COSO framework, the internal control weaknesses classified by the elements, including control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, monitoring, and the efficient and effective operations of the internal control objective are significant or one-tailed significant negative correlated to firm investment effectiveness. Collectively, if the internal control weaknesses were disclosed by the authorities, the firms had worse internal control efficiency, while the firms which were more conscious of internal control would disclose the internal control weaknesses themselves. The study shows that internal control weaknesses have impact on firm investment policy, and that internal control efficiency helps promote firm investment effectiveness.

發展援助議題一直是國際社會相當重要的議題，臺灣在面臨外交困境之際，仍致力於從事國際援助。然而，國際新興援助國的興起，加上發展中國家的轉變，對外援助趨勢逐漸朝向以受援國為主要核心價值的發展。近年來，緬甸逐漸對外開放，不但成為國際發展合作的新焦點，亦成為臺灣接觸的對象。本研究歸納整理國際發展援助的趨勢，並以緬甸為案例，利用文獻分析與深度訪談來分析當代援助模式。此外，為使本研究更具全球意義，將其他國家與國際組織對緬甸的發展合作策略納入分析，探討目前新興國家與緬甸的發展合作模式，並指出目前我國所面臨的援助有效性問題。 在全球化下的今日，僅是透過援助難以使一國持續向上發展，唯有結合投資才能促進發展。研究結果發現，相對於私部門因我國公部門受國際政治限制，使得援助效益不如預期。為此，本研究認為若能利用官方對外援助鼓勵我國私人企業對外投資，不僅能提升政府援助效率，亦可強化我國與受援國之經濟，進而帶動其他發展，對於我國與東南亞國家而言，為雙贏局面。 / Even under diplomatic plight, Taiwan, for long, has been committed to development assistance due to its importance to international community. During the past decade, with the rise of newly emerging donors and certain shifts within developing countries, rule of game has quickly changed. The need of recipients has become the focus of foreign aid, and this research intends to study if Taiwan’s assistance follows such emerging rules. Due to its ascending degree of opening-up, Myanmar has stepped into the spotlight of international and Taiwanese development cooperation in the past few years. To explore Taiwan’s foreign aid efficiency, the author will use Myanmar as a case, summarizing the trends in international development assistance, examining the strategies of different countries and international organizations, and comparing Taiwan’s development methods in this country. In the era of globalization, it is difficult to promote a country’s development without investment. The result of this study indicate that Taiwan’s foreign aid is ineffective due to （domestic）political restriction, therefore, if Taiwan can use official assistance to encourage private sectors to invest abroad, it will not only improve the efficiency of government assistance but also strengthen the economic link between Taiwan and recipient countries. Therefore creates a mutual-benefit situation for Taiwan and Southeast Asian countries.

隨著知識經濟的發展，專利成為企業的重要資產，專利訴訟更成為企業經營管理必修顯學。專利之高度技術內容及其商業化本質，使得專利訴訟成為技巧最複雜、成本最高昂、耗費時間也最冗長的救濟程序，終而引發各界對於專利訴訟制度之反思，開始強調應循公平、合理、迅速、經濟、專業之糾紛解決程序來排解專利糾紛。美國於1982年制訂專利法第294條開放專利有效性及專利侵權爭議得由當事人自願提付仲裁，聯合國國際貿易委員會於1985年制訂國際商務仲裁模範法（UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration），作為各會員國仲裁法制之參考藍本，世界智慧財產權組織（World Intellectual Property Organization，WIPO）亦於1994年成立「仲裁與調解中心」為智慧財產案件提供專業性及跨國性之糾紛解決服務。上開仲裁立法及機構設置均顯示專利仲裁制度之發展與成長。 專利是一種權利保護期間短暫、權利範圍不明確、保護客體高度技術化，且集結科技、法律、管理三大專業於一身之權利，其糾紛解決對於迅速性、專業性、經濟性、秘密性、靈活性、和諧性、跨國性及風險控制性之需求，正係仲裁程序所能提供之優點。惟專利權與仲裁程序仍有本質上之互斥，包括：專利權之獨佔性及其背後蘊含之龐大商機，吸引專利權人寧願循訴訟途徑奮戰到底；專利糾紛當事人之實力差距，使得雙方難以達成仲裁協議；專利糾紛對於調查證據之強烈需求，與仲裁程序強調之迅速、經濟致生衝突；專利判決的不確定性，以致專利案件約有50％的上訴成功率，此亦促使當事人欲循訴訟程序爭取由上訴審法官重新審視案件，而不願意循仲裁程序「一戰定江山」。 經本文就我國企業專利糾紛循仲裁程序解決進行分析，發現有下列幾點之限制：一、我國企業客觀實力不足，主觀心態復趨於保守，導致企業之糾紛程序選擇權受到一定的限制。二、仲裁程序以當事人合意為前提，雙方就現在之爭議欲達成仲裁協議，本即有一定之難度。三、我國仲裁法未開放專利有效性糾紛之仲裁容許性，權利有效性問題仍待行政法院認定，致生程序切割及審理時程延宕之不利益。四、我國仲裁制度因仲裁人之公正、獨立性有待加強、證據法則規範不夠完整且未能落實，導致程序正義不彰，當事人對仲裁制度信賴感普遍不足。五、我國仲裁法未明文賦予仲裁人核准保全程序之權限，當事人仍須向法院聲請假扣押、假處分裁定，不但緩不濟急，法官對於應否進行保全程序及核准為何種保全措施，其掌握度亦不如仲裁人。六、我國非紐約公約簽約國，以致於我國仲裁判斷面臨難以於外國獲得承認及執行之困境。上述幾點，都是我國企業專利糾紛欲循仲裁程序解決所面臨之限制因素。 有鑑於專利仲裁於我國企業之主要活躍領域，即美國與中國，已逐步成熟發展，本文謹建議我國企業面臨專利糾紛程序選擇時，應考量糾紛之目的及類型，以決定是否適用仲裁程序。若適用之，則需作好仲裁策略規劃，對於仲裁協議、仲裁地、仲裁機構、仲裁人、仲裁程序均應為適當之安排，以爭取最有利之仲裁判斷。 本文最末則自短程及長程觀點，對我國專利仲裁之發展提出建議。短程而言，我國企業就單純的法律解釋爭議、訟爭性不高或彼此間存有持續性合作關係之專利契約，宜約定仲裁條款；就專利侵權糾紛則得透過互相退讓之方式，約定就專利有效性爭議不為爭執，或同意被告之損害賠償上限，以換取適用仲裁之空間。長程而言，於仲裁立法面，我國應於仲裁法或專利法明文開放專利糾紛之仲裁容許性、增訂仲裁程序之調查證據規範、明文立法賦予仲裁庭核准保全程序之權限；於仲裁制度面，應提升仲裁人之公正性、獨立性及自律性、加強仲裁人之專業及制訂專業之專利仲裁規則；於企業策略面，建議企業應依專利糾紛之目的及類型為適當之程序選擇，如適用仲裁程序，則應妥善配置仲裁要素，規劃出最有利之仲裁程序。 / As the knowledge-based economy rapidly grows today, patent rights has become one of the most valuable assets of corporation. Patent litigation becomes the most important commercial method to generate massive revenue in nowadays. Patents usually involve complicated technology and commercial elements and patent litigation procedure is usually complicated, time consuming and mostly very expensive. Hence, new solutions, which are more fair, reasonable, rapid, economic and professional, are proposed to replace litigations. In the U.S., the Congress approved 35 U.S.C. 294 in 1982 to regulate rules allowing dispute parties may voluntary initiate binding arbitration procedure in regard with patent validity and infringement issues. The UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration enacted in 1985 offered as prototype of arbitration legislation for UN members. In 1994, the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center was established to offer professional and cross-broader Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) options for the resolution of intellectual property disputes between private parties. All these reforms show the development and growth of patent arbitration. Patent are characterized with limitations on period of protection, scope of claim and advanced technology. It involves with the knowledge of law, technology and commerce. Thus it will be required to deal with patent dispute with efficiency, profession, confidentiality, economic, flexibility, multi-nation and risk control when one decides which dispute resolution method to adopt, and arbitration is exactly the ADR method that satisfies all the requirements. Nevertheless, the exclusivity and the great commercial interests inherent behind patent litigation attract patentees to enforce their patent rights through courts regime. The difference in financial strength and interest leads to a difficulty for different parties to achieve an agreement. Extensive discovery procedure is almost compulsory in patent infringement litigation so that information between parties can be fully disclosed through the process. On the other hand, information disclosure is limited in arbitration proceedings. Also the parties may appeal a patent case in court, and it has an approximately 50% win rate in such attempt. All these factors decrease the parties’ intention to settle their case by arbitration. Through the case study and analysis of the Taiwan companies on patent litigation and arbitration history, it is not difficult to discover the deficiency of Taiwan’s current arbitration regime. The shortage in resource and unwillingness to take arbitral procedure restricts Taiwan companies to exercise they right to select dispute resolution procedure. Mutual consensus is the key priority for arbitration, but this could be extremely difficult to achieve on given patent dispute. Patent validity cannot be determined through the arbitration under current Taiwan Arbitration Law and needs to be determined by court, which prolongs the arbitral proceedings. Moreover, the professional ability of Taiwan’s arbitration remains in doubt, in terms of lack of fairness, independence and evidence rules, led the untrustworthiness of our arbitration regime. The arbitral tribunal has no authority to order interim measures, such as provisional seizure and preliminary injunction and Taiwan is not a signature party of New York Convention are also the factors that weaken the value of arbitration procedure in Taiwan. In comparison with the system in Taiwan, China and the U.S. patent arbitration are more systematized and are still increasing in numbers in both China and the United States. This thesis shall point out the factors for parties to consider adopting arbitration as patent dispute resolution, and assist parties to plan arbitration strategies. Lastly, this thesis will give suggestions on Taiwan’s patent arbitration regime development in both short and long terms. In short term, the public should be more aware the benefits by adopting arbitration clause in contract, when argument and disagreement might exist merely on obvious legal definition or less argument presented or when collaboration still exist between parties. This will encourage parties to agree to solve their dispute through arbitration in advance. In long term, legislators should regulate more detailed rules on arbitration procedure, evidence rules, and judicial support. Arbitration institutions should increase the training, improve the quality of arbitrators and develop more conscientious procedure rules. Corporation should have the concepts to learn and understand more about arbitration, and takes arbitration into consideration as commerce strategy in advance.

智慧財產案件審理法第16條揭示當事人抗辯智慧財產權有應撤銷、廢止之原因者，法院應就其主張或抗辯有無理由自為判斷，不適用相關法律停止訴訟程序之規定。前項情形，法院認有撤銷之原因時，智慧財產權人於該民事訴訟中不得對於他造主張權利。上開規定之意旨在於使同一智慧財產權所生之紛爭得於同一訴訟程序中一次解決，以對智慧財產權作有效保護。 依據上開規定，專利有效性之議題即可能為專利侵權訴訟程序及舉發程序所審理。兩程序審理之情形下，專利有效性之認定即可能會因對同一證據事實有不同見解而使認定結果產生歧異（嚴格定義下之判決歧異）或因證據/請求權基礎之不同而產生歧異（假性之判決歧異）。 民事法院和行政機關/法院於發明、新型及新式樣專利對專利有效性具兩歧認定之比例分別為所有抗辯專利有效性案件之6.8%、16%及12%。具歧異認定之案件中約有8%係因對同一證據之處理方式不同。約66%之案件係起因於呈送之證據有別及主張之撤銷理由不同，而此歧異認定或可於後續程序化解。另約有8%歧異認定之案件係因智慧局之見解受到先前經濟部對該見解之拘束，此分歧認定之結果或需藉由救濟程序才得化解。又約有16%具歧異認定之案件係因民事法院非以舉發程序中構成「舉發成立」之要件審酌系爭專利是否具撤銷事由，此歧異認定之結果尚需仰賴救濟程序始得化解。 民事法院倘非以舉發成立要件審酌專利有效性，則其審酌範疇可能涵蓋：得據以舉發事由、未達得據以舉發標準之事由、專利法及施行細則中得據以使申請案不予專利或不受理之事由。而有違誠信原則之事由亦可能受到審查，使系爭專利有不可執行之虞。倘民事訴訟有效性抗辯得涵蓋上開事由，則可預見本質不良但被智慧局誤准之專利將有去除之途徑，公眾利益即得以維護；專利申請人於申請過程中較可能考慮遵循誠信原則；且專利糾紛得以完全於一訴訟程序一併解決。專利環境或可能朝優質化、誠信化及效率化發展。於此架構下，侵權訴訟專利有效性抗辯機制及舉發程序之雙軌制審理即各有實質存在意義。 專利權人於台灣侵權訴訟具專利有效性抗辯案件之勝訴比約10%；敗訴案件中，發明、新型及新式樣專利被認定具無效事由之比例約為48%、65%及40%。審理法施行以來，舉發申請案之案件量約僅減少6%至7%，或隱含專利侵權訴訟不僅未於一定程度取代舉發制度更可能因而使當事人必需同時面對侵權訴訟與舉發程序雙軌戰場之處境。 審理法第16條之施行加快民事訴訟審結速度，達到迅速實現訴訟當事人權利保護之立法目的。而專利權所生之紛爭於同一訴訟程序中一次解決之目的，依檢驗角度之不同而有截然不同之結果，因此或可說未全然達到紛爭一次解決之立法目的。 / Article 16 of Intellectual Property Case Adjunction Act in Taiwan reveals that when a party claims or defends that an intellectual property right shall be cancelled, the court shall decide based on the merit of the case and the relevant laws concerning the stay of an action shall not apply.　Under the circumstances in the preceding paragraph, the holder of the intellectual property right shall not claim any rights during the civil action against the opposing party where the court has recognized the grounds for cancellation of the intellectual property right. The main purpose of the article is to solve the disputes over Intellectual Property Right in one litigation proceeding so as to protect the intellectual property right effectively. According to said article, the validity issue of a patent may be dealt with under civil litigation and invalidation proceedings. Under the circumstances, the decisions on the validity issue of a patent may be diverged due to different perceptions on the same evidence/fact (defined in this article as “actual decision divergence”) or different submitted evidences or instituted grounds (defined in this article as “fake decision divergence”). With respect to invention, utility model, and design patents, about 6.8%, 16% and 12% of cases with invalidity defense respectively had decision divergence between civil court and administrative organization/court. Among patents with decision divergence, around 8% of the patents were due to different perceptions of the same evidence. About 66% of the patents were deemed differently due to different evidences and instituted grounds. This discrepancy may be resolved in subsequent proceedings. Around 8% of the patents having divergent decisions were resulted from that the opinion of Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) is confined by that in a previous administrative action issued by its superior organization, the Board of Appeal. This discrepancy may need to be resolved through a remedial procedure. Approximately 16% of the patents were determined differently because the civil court adopted different standards for initiating an invalidation action. This type of discrepancy may only be resolved through a remedial procedure. When the civil court uses its own standards in determining the validity issue of the patent in question, the scope of judicial review might include: the grounds of invalidation proceedings, the grounds of invalidation proceedings with loosened standards, the grounds attributed to a patent being rejected or an application to be inacceptable to TIPO based on Patent Act or the Enforcement Rules of Patent Act. In addition, inequitable conduct might also be reviewed. Under the circumstances, defective patents have a chance to be removed, a duty of candor and good faith would be more likely to be followed during prosecution; patent disputes are able to be reviewed entirely in one proceeding. It is expected that the quality of the patent system would be improved. Moreover, either the invalidity defense mechanism in infringement litigation, or the invalidation proceeding serves its own purpose. For patent infringement cases with invalidity defense, plaintiffs won about 10% of the cases. Among the cases lost by plaintiffs, the patent at issue deemed by civil court as invalid accounted for about 48%, 65% and 40% for invention, utility model and design patents respectively. Since the IP Case Adjudication Act took effect, the number of invalidation cases has decreased about 6-7%, which might indicate that the invalidity defense mechanism in infringement litigation does not replace the invalidation proceeding. The regulation of Article 16 of IP Case Adjudication Act speeds up civil proceedings indicating that the legislative purpose of providing effective protection to parties in IP litigation may be realized. However, the legislative purpose of solving patent disputes in one proceeding may not be achieved fully as the test results vary on the basis of different evaluation criteria.