保險之經營，端賴再保險之運作，再次分肢危險與分擔損失，以求穩定與安全。長久 以來，再保險經紀人在市場中均扮演著極為重要的角色，透過其居間仲介之作用，撮 合許多再保險六易，更使各大保險市場之承保能量得以相互流通。 近十餘年來，國際再保險市場競爭日趨激烈，若干再保經紀人因財務虧損而宣告破產 ，除了嚴重影響當事人權益外，更衍生許多複雜之法律問題。由於吾國保險事業尚屬 起步階段，故業者與再保險經紀人有頗多接觸。除應持審慎態度防止上述問題發生， 更須對再保險經紀人之法律地位與基本性質作深入了解，方可確保業者自身之權益。 此亦為本研究之最主要目的。 本研究首先介紹再保險經紀人之基本概念，除追溯鄉其歷史浦源外，更綜合學術界與 實務界之竟見，為再保險經紀人歸納出正確的定義。再從不同角度，分析再保險經紀 人之功能，並評估再保險直接行銷與經紀制度之優劣。 其次，乃探挖再保險經紀人所生之法律問題，此為本研究之主要內容。除了本於代理 法基本原則，探討再保險經紀人之法律地位與基本職責外，更進而論及其財務處理方 面之特殊職責，及因失卻清償能力所衍生之法律問題。此外，並就新仲介人條款加以 介紹，探討其對實務界之影響及其法律效果。 最後，乃再保險經紀人監理問題之研究，並參考英美制度，與我國現況作一比較。

近年來，由於經濟不景氣及市場上之不確定因素，使得投資不動產成為保險業資金投入的新興熱門標的。因投資不動產之行為涉及憲法所保障之財產權，如非有特殊事由不得加以限制。保險法第146條亦有規定不動產為保險業得投資之法定項目之一。惟於現行相關法規規範下，保險業投資發展空間受到限制。究監理機關於此所扮演之角色為何？監理目標為何？於現行法制下，相關法規是否妥適合理等問題，皆有待探求。又隨著不動產投資投入之資金日趨增加，保險業者受裁罰之案例亦較過去為多。究過去裁罰當中，主管機關之處分有無不妥適之處，以及保險業者於投資不動產之相關缺失中，是否有可改善之空間，為本文所欲探討之目標。 / In recent years, real estate has become an increasingly popular investment target for insurers’due to uncertainties in the market and the economic downturn. Legally, investing in real estate is a constitutional right to property and protected specifically by the Insurance Act, Article 146. It cannot be infringed upon unless for specific, legitimate reasons. However, current regulations put a fair amount of limitation on investment in real estate. The adequacy of these regulations, as well as the goals and roles of our supervision system, is to be discussed. In addition, there are a growing number of administrative sanctions as insurance companies put more and more funds in real estate. This article also attempts to investigate if these penalties were appropriate and if there’s room for improvement on the insurers’ part.

隨著兩岸政策的逐漸鬆綁，台灣地區銀行業進入中國大陸深耕勢在必行，然而在兩岸分立分治之情況下，台灣地區之銀行業進入中國大陸設立分支機構時，除應符合台灣地區銀行監理機制外，更應了解中國大陸銀行業之監理規範，以期在符合兩岸監理機制及相關法令之規定下創造雙贏。 兩岸之監理原則，皆以母國監理原則為前提，並依據國際清算銀行（BIS）1992年公佈之「監理國際性銀行集團及海外分支機構最低標準」為指導原則，但針對目前兩岸跨國銀行之監理，台灣面臨最大的困境即是「國家認同」的問題。台灣目前的監理制度存在有深度（一般檢查）及廣度（專案檢查）的問題，且金融檢查係屬於交易發生後之事後檢查，故金融主管機關除加強金融檢查外，尚需督促金融機構建立落實內部控制及內部稽核機制，以健全金融機構之經營。 / As the cross-strait policy gradually untie, Bank deep into mainland China in Taiwan is a must, however in the case of partition of separation between the two sides, when set up branches of Taiwan banks entering the Mainland, apart from banking supervision mechanism in Taiwan should be consistent with, and should be aware of mainland China's banking supervision norms, with a view to in the cross-strait supervision mechanism and under the relevant provisions of the Act creates a win-win. Principles of supervision across the Taiwan Strait, are premised on the principle of home country supervision, and in accordance with the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) published in 1992 "minimum standards for the supervision of international banking groups and overseas branches" as the guiding principle, however, in response to the current cross-strait supervision of transnational Bank, Taiwan faces the biggest dilemma that is "national identity" issues. Taiwan depth with the existing supervision system (General check) and breadth (project review) issues, and financial checks belonging to transactions that took place after the ex-post checks, financial authorities in addition to strengthening the financial checks, still need to urge financial institutions to establish the implementation of internal control and internal audit mechanisms, based on sound management of financial institutions.