本研究以環境正義理論為基礎，探討事業廢棄物掩埋場開發決策背後導致衝突肇因之環境不正義議題及衝突化解之道。首先，針對國內事業廢棄物處理政策的發展脈絡，構築出政府現階段解決事業廢棄物最終處置的思維，一則積極推動源頭減量、回收再利用；其次，又企圖鼓勵興建掩埋場解決事業廢棄物最終處置問題的雙軌併行政策，在缺乏整合的運作邏輯之下，能否發揮事業廢棄物減量、降低掩埋場設置需求的政策執行成效？繼而，在地方政府被賦予審議或核定環境開發治理權的轉變之下，應如何扮演該決策制訂與審議制度運作的角色，藉由「台南縣東山鄉事業廢棄物掩埋場」興建個案研究，探究掩埋場設置衝突事件之肇因，及地方住民、環保團體抗爭訴求，與開發業者、地方政府在個案申請設置或開發決策過程中所呈現環境不正義之關連性，並進一步推導出在地住民因環境權的被剝奪，而從事此抗爭運動所衍生「環境正義理念」的主張。 本研究結論指出，除環保署應積極整合事業廢棄物「源頭減廢、回收再利用」與「鼓勵掩埋場設置」兩政策之執行計畫及成效，俾能藉由減少廢棄物之產出，以降低掩埋場設置需求外；地方政府進行事業廢棄物掩埋場開發決策制訂前，應賦權民眾參與的機制，嚴肅看待開發過程所衍生不正義的問題，提高決策的正當性及公信力；同時透過開發審議制度及法令結構的變革，亦即賦予當地住民獲得充分資訊的權利、公開聽證的權利、民主參與的權利、協調開發單位與受影響的住民簽訂「環境保護協定」，以及要求事業機構負起調整生產結構的責任，作為實踐環境正義理念的方法，藉以改善環境決策品質及決策制訂的思維，俾作為地方政府部門從事掩埋場設施開發決策，消彌環境不正義衝突爭議之參考，以提供另種紓解民眾衝突爭端的途徑。 / In this study based on the theory of environmental justice ,by industrial waste landfills lead to the development of decision-making behind the cause of the conflict of environmental injustice issues and the way to resolve the conflict. First of all, the cause for domestic waste disposal policy development context, the government resolved at this stage to build industrial waste final disposal of thinking, an actively to promote the source reduction, recycling and reuse.Secondly, an attempt to encourage establishment industrial waste landfills to solve the problem of final disposal of parallel two-track policy, a lack of integration in the operation of logic, could appear of reducing waste, reducing landfills established of the policy effectiveness？then, in local government be given consideration or approved development and control of environmental, how to play with the consideration of the decision-making role. By " In Dongshan Township,Tainan County industrial waste landfills" the established of case study, probe into landfills established the causes of conflict, and local residents, environmental groups protested demand, and local government development of decision-making process in the present environmental injustice relevance, and further deduced in the right environment for the inhabitants of the deprived, while engaged in this social movements against by the derivative "concept of environmental justice". This study concluded that, the EPD should actively integrated industrial waste, "the source of waste reduction, recycling and reuse" and " encourage to establish of landfills " two policy implementation plan and effectiveness, achieved to reduce waste output and the need for establish of landfills . Local government for industrial waste landfills development decision-making, should be to empower public participation, look at the development process is derived from the issue of injustice, enhance the legitimacy and credibility of the decision-making.At the same time, through the development checkup system and changes in the structure of act, which gives local residents the right to receive adequate information, the right to public hearings, the right to democratic participation, coordinated developer and residents affected by the signing of environmental protection agreements and require producer assume the responsibility of the production structure adjustment, as a practical way the concept of environmental justice, to improve the quality of decision-making, it could serve as a local government departments engaged in the development of decision-making landfills facilities, eliminating the environmental injustice a reference for controversial conflict , to provide another kind of dispute the way the conflict.

本文認為生存權係為社會權權利範疇中之最重要者。社會權之興起與資本主義強調利潤極大化的追求，產生社會不平等的現象與個人自由權流於形式有關。社會權主要的目的便在於彌補自由權的缺失，讓國家權力可以積極的作為使社會公平與正義得以實現，並使人權保障體系更臻於完整，職是之故，社會權可謂為基本人權中的重要一環，也是使個人自由與社會正義得以實現的基石。 作為道德倫理權利的社會權，其基礎建立於社會正義之上。因此，為使社會權得以實踐，國家必須以積極的差別待遇原則，使得最不利處境之人得到最大的利益。因此，政府的必須利用其分配部門規範出一個可以符合正義標準的分配比例與分配方式，來進行合理的正向所得重分配並避免貧富差距過大，保障處於不利地位者可獲得保障。當中，法定年金保障制度便屬於分配部門可利用的一種重分配方式。 作為法律權利的社會權係為一法律複合權利，在社會權眾多的權利範疇中，最為核心的權利為生存權。而生存權保障可謂為社會權實踐的基石。此乃因生存係一切權利實現之基礎，無生存則一切權利實為空談；又個人生存乃社會存在之前提，為使社會持續存有與發展，確保個人生存實為首要課題。而個人生存與基本需要的滿足是息息相關的。廣義的生存權，乃指人民有要求國家保障其生存的權利，國家應積極的實施各種政策來防止人民遭到不當侵害，並且使人民享有經濟、健康、文化上的最低生活，協助其發展潛能以謀求整體社會的安定和諧與延續發展，就此而言，其目標可謂與社會權一致。觀諸我國憲法第15條：『人民之生存權、工作權及財產權，應予保障。』之規定，我國生存權之法性格至少應屬抽象權利說，屬於廣義生存權意涵。據此，憲法則賦予了人民權利有權向國家請求立法以維護其生存權益。 現今社會中，經濟的安全乃個人生存保障之前提。年金保障制度係為經濟安全保障制度重要一環。本文指出以經濟安全的角度來界定個人生存與基本需要保障程度時可分為二個不同的層次：一、經濟安全滿足了基本的生理需要，以維持個人身體健康；二、經濟安全維持了個人適當生活水準，確保了個人身體健康與精神自主，並且維持個人良好的社會參與與社會活動。 本文認為以政府對個人的保障來區分，生存權的保障實可分為三個層面：第一個層面為基本生活的保障，如最低生活的維持、基本生命的延續等等；第二個層面是健康生活的保障，強調在維持基本生命之餘，個人應有更安全生活的權利；第三個層面則為文明生活的要求，強調個人尊嚴生存與參與社會。理想中，政府應朝向第三個層面的保障而積極作為，不然至少也應保障個人基本生活。 因此，為落實社會權、生存權保障，本文以為法定年金保障制度之架構必須依循在下列的原則建構：一、法定年金給付水準必須滿足人民基本需要的保障；二、法定年金資源的分配需符合正義原則；三、法定年金制度保障責任應由國家承擔。四、年金財務制度務必健全，以確保社會權保障的來源。五、法定年金保障制度之架構應降低商品化、階層化之程度，使其滿足個人生活機會上之平等。 在上述原則之下，政府應建構良善的法定年金保障制度，給人民的基本需要滿足與生活保障，在政府的法定年金部分應致力於去商品化、去階層化，並以所得正向重分配的原則來設計財務制度，給付水準應符合生存權保障，所有人民都應納入保障範圍之中，並給予足夠的給付，以使個人擁有實現積極自由的環境和達到正義社會的理想。 本文以為符合社會權實踐意涵與生存權保障的法定年金制度其應包含了國民年金與職業年金兩部分，前者所有國民都有權參加其保障體系中，參加者則具有領取年金之權利，後者將具有工作者（甚至包含工作者家人）納入其保障體系。年金給付項目應包含老年、遺屬、身心障礙，後兩者的給付水準應參酌其生活所需以較高的水準給付之。國民年金的財務制度應具有正向所得重分配的效果，職業年金的財務責任則由政府、雇主、受雇者三者共同分擔之，其制度也應具有一定程度的正向所得重分配效果，勿使因所得差距而造成貧富兩極的階層化現象。

本論文探討的是，六十五年前台灣受過苦難的白色恐怖政治受難者重回受害地，成為人權博物館兩園區志工之傷痕記憶轉化歷程。此歷程從個人傷痕記憶著手，含括他們參與人權館說故事後的自我轉化，及轉化後對該館於臺灣社會實踐轉型正義中的角色扮演期待。探索個體與集體記憶是件困難的事，是故起點回到綠島、景美兩處受難地，幽暗無聲卻蘊含飽滿故事的場所，參觀者在此可認識歷史並感受他們受過的苦難。 研究動機肇始於，研究者觀察到不是每位經歷過苦難的人都能重回曾經的受害地，更遑論驅離自己內心的黑暗，點亮傳遞人權之火。很多人仍噤聲不語的生活，惟卻有幾十位受難者志工願意回到園區，說出自己的經歷。國家暴力導致之歷史事件，讓他們成為監獄受害地的一部分，監獄經過社會政治制度的轉變成為博物館，出獄多年後或遺忘或埋藏的人與事，當再進入博物館重見押房牆面留存舊時斑駁痕跡，便即喚起他們內心的傷痕記憶。情境讓記憶甦醒，園區成為說故事場所，他們說故事也觸動個人生命轉化。 研究對象以1950～1970年代十位不同意識型態受難者志工為主，研究者經過近兩年多長期間的相處觀察，與兩個多月訪談分析，看見與熟悉著不同受訪對象的情緒風貌，瞭解他們傷痕記憶的異與同，經歸納分析後，提出不同年代他們有所差異的傷痕記憶建構模式。 研究者更透過該等模式深刻瞭解，十個故事中個體與集體，彼此記憶交錯的幾種複雜情緒，與情緒及內心正面力量的交互作用；也分析不同傷痕故事中隱存之歷史脈絡，與脈絡及個體在過去所想、所看的當時集體社會狀態之關連。更獲知，另有一群受難者，有別於當下臺灣社會認知主流冤錯假案外之另類記憶。人與空間的複雜關係，在過去，如暗室囚禁的恐懼，強化傷痕記憶深植於受難者心中，此記憶並與實質囚房空間密切聯結著；時空改變後，現在，監獄囚室的受害場所內涵轉化為展示歷史的博物館，空間與傷痕感受聯結之記憶，便以故事形式於人權館再現。人權館成為受難者生命質變的場所，它讓他們說故事的意義變得不一樣，產生自我傷痕解構後的療癒結果，也對不同年代他們，不僅對自我，也對參觀者、更對台灣社會產生正面影響。 本研究發現，轉型正義必須從人開始，積極實踐的基礎則是，賦予社會生活中的每個人應重視人權教育，與點燃其探詢歷史真相的熱忱，及擁有維護社會公平正義的態度。除了前述實踐基礎發現外，受難者與人權館又促成另者改變，個體轉化後對群體社會狀態的正面影響，即參觀過該館的年輕人開始關注阻止身邊不正義的現象，與挺身制止違反公共道德的主動行為。此等個體與群體行為的改變，更強化受難者更積極投身人權館，促成該館公共性價值的形成，此價值是民主制度構成之關鍵核心原點，即是公民參與由下而上的集體動能。此動能再促使該館運作更符合社會各界期待，令它在台灣實踐轉型正義失落中，扮演還原歷史真相、教育思想傳遞的關鍵角色。 / This research was aimed to live through and to record the transformation and transcendence of the 65-year-old bitter, traumatic memories of White Terror as the surviving victims returned to the sites of terror, namely Green Island and Jingmei, now both divisions of Taiwanese National Human Rights Museum, to work as volunteer narrators. The records of this sublimation process started with the victims’ memories of sufferings, and as they began to voluntarily tell their own stories, they turned their personal traumas into eager expectations for the National Human Rights Museum to trigger the practice of transitional justice in the entire Taiwanese society. To explore every piece of individual as well as collective memory, both sites of terror, where gloomy silence used to haunt with heart-breaking stories untold, were repeatedly visited so that the painful history could be relived. For the rest of their lives, many victims of White Terror could only live in total silence, never to bring themselves back to the place of sufferings again, let alone lighting up the dark corners inside their hearts and passing on the torch of human rights. However, this study was motivated by the observation that several dozens of White Terror victims did come back to where they had been tortured to tell people their sad stories. In the Museum, every little trace on the walls of the preserved prison cells brings back these victims’ traumatic memories. As these victims relive their painful years in prison and share their stories, the Museum becomes a place where history is passed on and life is lifted up to a higher level. The subjects of this research were ten volunteers, each with a different ideology, who had been prisoned for political reasons during the 1950~1970 period. Through more than two years’ close observation as well as intensive depth interviews that spanned more than two months, the researcher was able to depict these storytellers’ deepest emotions and form a time-bound traumatic memory construction model after analyzing the similarities and differences of the interviewees’ traumatic memories. By applying the model developed, the researcher was able to detect several complicated emotions hidden behind intertwined individual/collective memories as well as some conflicting interactions between those dark emotions and certain positive energy inside. Meanwhile, the historical context could also be revealed by studying those traumatic stories, and so could the relation between the social status perceived by the individuals and the historical context at that time. Notably, this study also discovered that a certain group of White Terror victims actually bear in mind some alternative memories of fear that are off the mainstream and are distinct from the so-called cases of injustice. Dynamic relationships have always existed between human beings and space. In the past, fears towards the dark prison cells were planted deeply in the victims’ hearts. Yet, as the very site of persecution has been turned into a window for history display, the memories that used to connect the fear and the prison cells have now become stories that are passed on and on for the sake of human rights enhancement. The storytellers’ lives have thus sublimed, for the repeated actions of storytelling have been decomposing and healing the traumas inside their hearts, and having positive influence to the visitors of the Museum and to the whole Taiwanese society as well. This study has confirmed that transitional justice has to start with people. To actively put transitional justice in practice, every individual in the society has to be well educated to cultivate a good sense of human rights, a positive attitude towards social justice, and enthusiasm for the exploration of historical truths. In the Human Rights Museum, the volunteer narrators have not only transformed their lives from miserable victims into determined social justice promoters but have also influenced and encouraged young visitors to start paying attention to incidences of injustice happening around them and to take actions against them. The positive influences form a cycle and reinforce one another, helping to shape a collective, bottom-up value system that is the very core of democracy.

關於國家制裁手段之選擇，包含立法權與司法權對於國家制裁手段之選擇，而國家制裁手段類型之選擇(即刑事制裁手段與行政制裁手段之選擇)，此為國家制裁手段外在選擇，而國家制裁手段之內在選擇為國家權力針對同一種類型之制裁手段之選擇，亦包含國家制裁手段之效力選擇，前者可以稱為內部界限，後者為外部界限。 關於章節安排，本文第二章首先從法益概念去釐清應罰性之概念界定，在第三章探討國家制裁手段選擇之因素，此部分本文分為「國家制裁手段之類型選擇標準」(即選擇行政制裁手段、刑事制裁手段)與「國家制裁手段之效力選擇標準」(即當國家已經選擇某種制裁手段後，該制裁手段之法律效果亦會產生選擇之問題)。前者部分，本文介紹行政制裁手段與刑事制裁手段於學說上的區分理論，再來探討我國實務見解如何在兩種制裁手段選擇，藉由實務運作模式整理與分析，提出一套可受檢驗的國家制裁手段選擇標準。本文認為國家制裁手段選擇之標準為「法益」以及「程序保障」之觀點作為國家制裁手段類型選擇之標準與國家制裁手段效力選擇標準之依據。在第四章部分，本文以在第三章所建立之國家制裁手段選擇標準，將我國現行刑法第231條為例作為檢驗。第五章為「結論」，將綜合前述各章，就「助娼行為」之國家制裁手段選擇的討論做一總結並提出立法建議，期能更了解該國家制裁手段選擇的意義及功能。

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(文学) / 甲第19353号 / 文博第694号 / 新制||文||624(附属図書館) / 32367 / 新制||文||624 / 京都大学大学院文学研究科行動文化学専攻 / (主査)教授 松田 素二, 教授 伊藤 公雄, 教授 水野 直樹 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Letters / Kyoto University / DGAM

本文之目的，是要探討兩岸人民關係條例第二十一條限制設籍台灣地區未滿十年之原大陸地區人民不得出任公務人員規定之合憲性，並擇定以平等權觀點作為切入論述的角度。全文共分為六大部分：第一部分確認大陸地區人民與設籍台灣地區未滿十年之原大陸地區人民在我國之法律地位為得享有平等服公職權之主體。第二部分確立平等權審查之基準，包括事務本質、憲法整體價值、體系正義及比例原則，是為檢證系爭條文合憲性及貫穿本文之核心價值標準。第三部分分析各國及我國公務員法制中，以忠誠度為考量來設定之審核申請出任公務員者「適任性」之法定任用條件之立法目的及法則，以找出與申請者適任公務人員與否重要相關之本質要素為何。第四部分則是分析設籍台灣地區未滿十年之原大陸地區人民之本質屬性，是否具有不適出任公務人員之重要本質要素。第五部分檢討系爭條文所採差別待遇之手段及內容，是否符合比例原則。最後，本文就系爭條文是否符合憲法平等保障人民基本權利之意旨作一綜合評析，並嘗試提出修正系爭條文之具體建議。 / The Mainland Chinese people have become Taiwan people since they settled down in Taiwan area. However, Article 21 of the Statute Governing the Relations between People in Taiwan Area and People in Mainland Area stipulates that the former Mainland Chinese people registered residences in Taiwan area within 10 years (hereafter “former Mainland Chinese people” ) couldn’t serve as civil servants. It is debatable whether said stipulation constituting a discriminatory treatment to part of nationals serving in public service violates Article 7 of the Constitution guaranteeing the right of equality. To begin with, this paper defines the legal status of Mainland Chinese people as nationals from Constitution point of view. Then, the paper looks into the subject from several points of view, including the nature of the addressed subject, the value system of the Constitution, and the purpose of enactment. It is find that the preclusion of the former Mainland Chinese people serving as civil servants is in harmony with amendment to the Constitution. It is furthermore not in conflict with the equal protection of law provided in Article 7 of the Constitution. However, part of the measure of the above said statute not in accord with the principle of Proportion should be amended in order to concur with preservation of state security and the adequate exercise of rights to serve in public service of the people. The Germany’s civil service law, which provides conditions of reappointment of former civil servants under German Democratic Republic after German unification serves as a most valuable reference model.

本論文之主要論旨，在於探討公平正義是否可能在裁判之過程中獲得實現。筆者主要透過德沃金的法理論以及平等理論作為討論的出發點。筆者首先對於德沃金的理論進行相關的分析與討論。德沃金的法理論主要可區分為四個部分，包括：語義階段，法理階段，原理階段，以及裁判階段。在語義階段，德沃金指出，法律的概念，必須要作為一個詮釋性概念；在法理階段，德沃金將法律的概念當成一種政治價值的概念。德沃金認為，法律的概念所表彰的政治價值，便是「合法性價值」，亦即「法治」。進一步，德沃金指出，對於「合法性價值」與「法律的概念」的最佳理解，便是「整全性」。筆者認為，「整全性」是一個連接德沃金的「法理論」以及「平等理論」的關鍵概念。在《法律帝國》一書當中，德沃金主張：裁判的整全性，要求法官適用由公平與正義原則所推導出來的法律。這樣的主張，將我們帶向德沃金的平等理論。 德沃金的平等理論可以區分為兩個層面，一為討論關於分配正義的資源平等理論，另一為關乎政治權力分配的政治平等理論。這兩個概念，提供了司法裁判實踐公平正義的可能性。資源平等理論提供了相關的判準，可以使法院在裁判具體個案時得以援引，以判斷公民所擁有的具體權利，以及政府是否違反了在平等關懷下所需踐行的平等保護原則，而導致侵害人民的權利。同時，政治平等理論則為民主制度下的司法審查，提供其理論基礎。 最後，德沃金指出，關於裁判如何適用法律於具體個案的裁判過程，其與上述三階段有密切的關聯性。德沃金認為，在此一階段中，他與法實證主義者最大的不同，便是在於對於法官的裁量權的理解。德沃金認為，在其法理論體系當中，法官對裁量權的行使，是一種法律義務，而非如法實證主義者所稱，是一種道德責任。 不可避免的，對於德沃金的理論，存在有許多的反對意見。在此筆者援引了Joseph Raz以及Samuel Schaffler的論文，對德沃金的理論進行檢試。Raz指出，德沃金的理論本身，與其所主張的融貫並未有直接的關係，同時，德沃金的理論，忽略了權威在現代國家中所扮演的角色。Schaffler則指出，德沃金過份的強調經濟平等，因而致政治或社會平等遭到忽視。此外，Schaffler認為，德沃金的資源平等理論裡，欠缺對於境況與志向的區分標準。最後，Schaffler則是提到，德沃金的資源平等理論，隱藏著存在階級社會的可能性。 的確，Joseph Raz以及Samuel Schaffler的論文提供了反思性的觀點，不過，筆者認為，他們所提出的問題，無法成功的全然拒絕德沃金的理論。筆者認為，德沃金的法理論，成功的融合了「法治」以及「正義」與「公平」，因此，其理論也確實為司法裁判實踐公平正義的理念，提供了可能了路徑。 關鍵字：公平、正義、語義階段，法理階段，原理階段，裁判階段、法理論、平等、整全性、融貫、平等關懷 / The main issue of my thesis focuses on whether realization of the ideal of justice and fairness in adjudication is possible. I discuss this main issue by means of Dworkin’s legal theory and his theory of equality. First of all, I start my discussion with analysis of Dworkin’s legal theory, which includes four stages: the semantic stage, the jurisprudential stage, the doctrinal stage, and the adjudicative stage. In semantic stage, Dworkin points out that the concept of law should be interpretive concept. In jurisprudential stage, he deems the concept of law as a concept of political values, and what the value presented by concept of law is the value of legality. Furthermore, he considers the best concept of the value of the legality, so as the best conception of law, is integrity. I believe this is the key concept which connects Dworkin’s legal theory with theory of equality. In Law’s Empire, Dworkin said that integrity in adjudication asks judges apply the laws which come from the principle of justice and fairness. This leads us to Dworkin’s theory of equality. Dworkin presents his theory of Equality with two dimensions. One is equality of resources, which could be narrowly seen as a theory about distributive justice. The other is political equality concerning the distribution of political power. These two dimensions of his theory of equality offer the possibility of realizing the justice and fairness in adjudication. The theory of equality of resources offers the guidelines for courts to follow when deciding if citizens have some sort of concrete rights, and if government violates the equal protection of citizen’s rights that demanded by the ideal of equal concern. According to political equality, it offers the basis of judicial review in democracy. Finally, Dworkin points out that how judges apply laws to concrete case is something related to those three stages as mentioned above. Dworkin distinguishes himself from the legal positivists, such as Hans Kelsen and H.L.A. Hart. The different between Dworkin and legal positivists is discretion power of judges. In his theory, it is judge’s legal obligation rather than moral responsibility as positivists regard. Inevitably, there are some critics to Dworkin’s theory of equality. Here I cited the research of Joseph Raz and Samuel Schaffler to exam Dworkin’s theory. Their articles offer reflective points of view to me. Joseph Raz criticizes Dworkin’s theory as something irrelative to the coherence that Dworkin himself requests. He further criticizes that Dworkin’s theory of adjudication ignores the role of authority in modern state. Samuel Scheffler criticizes that Dworkin’s theory of equality ignores the importance of political and social equality. Besides, how to distinguish circumstance and ambition is not clear enough in Dworkin’s theory. Furthermore, Scheffler considers that Dworkin’s theory of equality may allow a heirachy administration exists. Although they point out some defects, I do not think they did fulfill significant challenges to Dworkin’s theory. After all, I consider that Dworkin’s legal theories build up a perfect framework for realizing the value of legality, which can also be referred as the rule of law. Most importantly, his legal theories are coherent the other moral values and convictions of ethics. I think Dworkin’s theories of law and equality may offer the best possibility to realize the ideal of justice and fairness in adjudication. Key Words: justice, fairness, the semantic stage, the jurisprudential stage, the doctrinal stage, the adjudicative stage, integrity, coherence, legal theory, equality, equal concern

Michael Walzer美國當代社群主義的代表人物，同時也是一位出名的公共知識分子，其哲學思想與政治理念均有其獨到之處，而其中Walzer特別強調社會才是作為個人權利與自由實踐的場所，而擺脫了傳統自由主義理論下，只存在國家與個人的關係。而其最著名的正義的諸領域(Spheres of Justice)，更是在研究近代關於自由主義與社群主義正義論的一本經典，而Walzer正義論中最吸引我的地方在於其放棄像是John Rawls等正義理論的無知之幕，反而主張在討論正義的時候，應該以每個不同社會和社群之間的文化與歷史的發展為基礎，因此Walzer的正義理論強調各種不同的特殊性，而維護正義是國家所必須要出面來作的一件事情，但如何維護多元、自由的社會諸領域中的不同正義原則，Walzer提出一套「複雜平等概念」的哲學思考模式，以及從「公眾利益」為出發點的利益衡量原則。 因此結合Walzer的複雜平等概念與公眾利益的衡量原則，本文提出一套「權利實踐理論」，在這個理論架構之下將會注意到其實法律上所謂的權利僅是作為一種象徵法律權威的意義而已，真正個人想要落實權利實踐必須要集合足夠的政治權力才能夠獲得一個社會實踐的空間與可能性，而這往往與個人在詮釋法律的方式與態度有關，也就是說只有個人提供一個好的詮釋之理由，才能夠獲得足夠的政治權力的協助來個人權利的實踐。 但是法律中往往存在許多「不確定法律概念」，這是為了在特殊的情況時，來能夠實踐個別正義的設計，而法官所負擔的工作，就是透過詮釋，在個案中確立法律概念與原則，有時候會發覺法官並沒有再進行法律的詮釋工作，而也許只是單純的「依法判決」重新確認權利人行使權利之資格而以，但為何有時卻會有限縮或是擴張解釋法律的情況出現，而這背後的判斷標準和原則到底又是什麼，法官這樣做是否合法？是否由於法官是詮釋行為中的最高權威，就代表法官擁有自由的詮釋法律的空間？ 但從Walzer的思考脈絡中，我們可以知道最高的權威者，還是有一定的責任與必須遵守地義務，但其同時也有一定程度的自由和自主決定的空間，依照Walzer的說法，國家也就是站在是最高權威者角色上，維護個人和社會自主性是其必須地義務，並且要防範任何形式的暴力破壞個人和社會的自主性，包含國家自身，而這時候衡量與判斷的標準往往就是所謂地「公共利益」或是「公眾利益」因此公眾利益是判斷國家行為合法性的依據。 而本文就嘗試以美國著作權法中，合理使用原則的公眾利益衡量標準，觀察法官是如何「公共利益」型塑某些原則的重要性，而且也同時還能保留有一定的開放性空間，以處理個案中截然不同地主張與原則的空間。

我國經濟犯罪之範圍，係由司法機關(司法院)與行政機關(法務部) 分別以作業性之行政規則頒訂，仍以侵害個人財產法益之金融犯罪為 規範對象。 就經濟犯罪所得，由於其性質屬於準不當得利之衡平措施，自應予以 追繳或抵償(再發還被害人或充公收歸國有)以修復正義，該行為只要 與法規範對立矛盾(即具有不法構成要件該當之違法性)即足，無庸探 究行為人之罪責要件。我國將犯罪所得規定為從刑，須待行為人(即 被告)受有罪科刑判決方能併宣告沒收，緩不濟急。 建議將犯罪所得追繳後發還被害人之個別法律，移置於刑法總則一體 適用，定性為強制處分，並將沒收、追繳、追徵或抵償自從刑之規定 刪除，另於刑事訴訟法宣示判決之條文增加發還被害人或得請求損害 賠償之人，且得由法院依職權或依檢察官之聲請權單獨宣告。 我國附帶民事訴訟受請求之被告，不限於刑事訴訟進行中之被告，尚包括「其他依民法應負賠償責任之人」，刑事庭法官遇有此種情形，因對渠等並無確定刑罰權有無及範圍之權限，在刑事訴訟程序的操作上格格不入，有仿襲德國刑事訴訟法第403條規定，被請求人應以刑事被告為限。 由於附帶民事訴訟規範之目的在避免雙重工作負擔及二次裁判，惟依 現行刑事訴訟法之規定，法官除刑事判決外，另需製作一份民事訴訟 判決，如此顯違反前揭附帶民事訴訟規範之目的；故正本清源之道， 乃無庸另製作一份附帶民事訴訟之判決，就犯罪不法利得，逕於刑事 判決主文中諭知發還被害人或給付若干金額予被害人。 被害人與加害人間共同參與之修復式司法近年來在世界各國實務及 學說均肯定其實踐層面之重要性，為具體落實憲法訴訟權應保障犯罪 被害人公平且有效的權利救濟途徑及程序主體性之地位，本文建議在 審理刑事案件之前階段即擴大強制調解及和解制度之運用，由被告及 被害人共同參與決定採取何種途徑最有利於促成實質修復正義之結 果，俾利被害人程序主體性之建立及擴大紛爭解決一次性之要求。 / Economic crime in Taiwan is defined by the administrative regulations of the Judicial Yuan and the Ministry of Justice, respectively. Such regulations are aimed at financial crimes that damage personal property. Because the proceeds of economic crimes are “quasi-kondiktionelle Ausgleichsmaßnahme”, the courts should seize the profits, and then use them to either compensate victims or confiscate them in the name of serving justice. So long as this offense is contradictory to criminal law (i.e. constituting the penal code and finding no specific legal cause for that offense), the courts need not review the problem of offender's guilt. As ill-gotten gains are stipulated as “Nebenstrafe” in the Taiwan penal code, the courts cannot confiscate those gains unless there is a simultaneous conviction, which seems too slow. The following suggestions are presented. The individual laws regulating “Verfall” and compensation to the victims should be reorganized in the penal code and characterized as “maßnahme”. The legal effect of these laws as “Nebenstrafe” should be deleted. The articles relating to the compensation of criminal proceeds to the victims should be increased as well. In addition, the courts should be allowed to announce verdicts either alone by its authority or according to the prosecutor’s request. In Taiwan, defendants accused during the adhesion process are not limited to being defendants in the process of criminal litigation, but also include other persons who should bear damages in accordance with civil law. When criminal court judges face this situation, since it is not certain whether there is a right to impose criminal punishment, or what the scope of punishment should be, there are inconsistencies in the operations of the criminal litigation procedure. There have been attempts to imitate Germany’s Criminal Litigation Law Clause 403, in which the accused should be limited to criminal defendants. The purpose of the rules on the adhesion process is to prevent a double workload and multiple judgments. However, according to existing requirements for criminal litigation, in addition to criminal judgments, judges must also make civil litigation judgments. This violates the aforementioned purpose of adhesion process rules. Thus, the way to rectify this situation is to create another adhesion process judgment based on the proceeds of crime, in order to assign restitution or to pay a certain amount to the victim, inside the main text of the criminal judgment. Restorative justice, in which the victim and offender jointly participate, has recently been affirmed in its importance, both in theory and in practice, all over the world. In order to concretely realize the principle that constitutional litigation rights should protect crime victims, as well as provide fair and effective remedial paths and procedural subjectivity, this study suggested that in the stage prior to judging criminal cases, there should be expanded use of enforced arbitration and mediation systems, in which the defendant and the victim jointly participate, in order to determine the best course for promoting restorative justice, to satisfy the demand for victim procedural subjectivity, and to expand the one-time character of dispute resolutions.

伴隨著世界歷史步入二十一世紀，以企業為核心的市場體系處於一個大的結構性調整。企業能否順利調整到為整個世界的經濟發展服務，成為了全球各大公司所關注的首要問題。在此轉捩點，各個勵精圖治的企業家無一例外的選擇了擴大經營規模，世界500大的公司都是靠收購和合併發展起來，國際企業經常以併購的方式進行企業水平、垂直整合，以利於從事專業經營，提升經營效率，為因應企業全球化趨勢，有關企業併購法制之完備及明確，勢所必需。 企業收購合併為一法律上饒富興味之課題，這不只因為合併具有多種的形態，更因為合併涉及企業間複雜的權利義務關係，使得多種面向的法律領域都與之產生牽連。 本論文之結構安排如下：第一章為緒論，介紹本篇論文之研究動機、背景、以及研究方法與範圍。第二章為法律經濟分析概述，介紹法律經濟分析的內涵、背景、發展以及與傳統法學研究上之差異，並說明為何選取以法律經濟分析之方式作為研究主軸。第三章法律經濟分析的經濟理論基礎，主要對法律經濟分析中經常運用到個體經濟學的最大化、效益、供需理論及賽局理論進行分析與闡述。第四章為企業併購概述。第五章台灣企業併購現況。第六章為企業併購法制之經濟分析檢視各種現行法之可行性，並建議以經濟觀點構築之法制作為解決方案。第七章為結論與建議。 本文的主要目的以一種法律經濟分析的不同視角，從企業併購的經濟學基礎、法律制度的供需狀況、效率等方面論證對企業併購法制進行法律規範的必要性和合理性，有系統地檢視企業併購於現行法中所扮演之功能分析是否符合經濟學中效率的觀念，並且分析於現行企業併購法制發生違反效率的情況。 / During the last quarter of the twentieth century, the humanities and social sciences have turned toward history, something that culminated in the 1990s, and this phenomenon was evident in law as well. However, until recently, law and economics, the most influential post-World War II jurisprudential movement, was a-historical in its methodology and research agenda. The objective of this article is to call attention to economic analysis of merger and acquisition law, its methodological causes, and the nature of its interaction with other sub-fields of law and of economics. Mergers and acquisitions are undoubtedly among the most significant macro-economic phenomena of the industrialized West during the last twenty years. The size of acquisitions is constantly rising, with no sign of this phenomenon being part of a passing trend. Taking into consideration the diverse and complex aspects of acquisitions, the Article attempts to develop a comprehensive theoretical model that defines acquisition law's central policy goals and suggests criteria to be followed in order to ensure the achievement of these goals.