第一章 緒論 主要說明本文之研究動機、目的、範圍及方法。 第二章 收養當事人一方死亡 收養當事人一方死亡時，對收養關係究有何影響，學說、立法例及實務之見解不一，本章除對此詳予說明外，並就民國七十四年增訂之死後終止收養之意義、內涵、要件及其效力，逐次論述之。 第三章 收養之撤銷 我國民法親屬編有關收養之撤銷，於民國七十四年修正前，並無隻宇片言之規定，而就其行使之方法及效力亦未提及，故適用時疑義頗多，學說及實務見解分歧。鑑此，民國七十四年修法時，乃增訂收養撤銷之相關規定，惟疏漏仍屬難免，本章茲就新舊法之比較，並藉由新舊學說，立法例及實務見解逐一說明其間之疑義。 第四章 收養之終止 我國現行收養終止之原因大致上可分協議終止、判決終止、死後終止及兒童福利法與少年福利法上之終止等五種，其中除死後終止已於第二章加以論述外，本章則就其餘四種終止之原因及其效力，一一逐次探討說明之。 第五章 結論 末不揣淺陋爰臚列數點立法建議以為本文之結論。

京都大学 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(生命科学) / 甲第23339号 / 生博第457号 / 新制||生||61(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院生命科学研究科高次生命科学専攻 / (主査)教授 垣塚 彰, 教授 今吉 格, 教授 鈴木 淳 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Philosophy in Life Sciences / Kyoto University / DFAM

分散式系統具有資源共享及運算更有效率等優點，使得分散式系統的應用越來越廣泛，有關分散式系統的研究也越受重視。一些存在分散式系統中的不正常現象，如：死結(deadlock)，饑餓(stravation)，及臨界競賽(critical race)往往會抵消掉資源共享的好處並且容易產生通訊(communication)的錯誤，另外，保證一分散系統中行程(process)均能正確的執行終止(termination)也是一項值得研究的重要課題。 　　本篇論文將就分散系統中的死結、饑餓、臨界競賽及中止等問題之過去的文獻提出討論，並分別比較優、缺點，最後列出一些尚未解決及值得深入研究的問題。 / There are some addvantages of distributed systems, such as resources sharing and computing efficiency. Thus, the applications of distributed systems are more prevalent. The research of distributed systems had got great worth. Some undesired or abcdrmal behaviors such as deadlock, starvation, and critical race exist in distributed systems, which often offset the advantages of resources sharing and are prone to communication errors. It is very important to guarantee the processes of a distributed system which can terminate finitely. 　　In this thesis, we'll have thorough discussions and comparisons of those four properties through literature survey and then point out some unsolved problems at last.

團體壽險是員工福利思潮下之產物，至今已成為分散、轉嫁企業人身及責任風險不可或缺之風險管理工具。而團體壽險以一張保險單承保多數被保險人，此項「團體」之特性使其在核保、保險費、部分有效性及契約條款之設計上，有別於一般之人壽保險。目前，各家保險公司之團體壽險保險單悉以主管機關制訂之「團體一年定期人壽保險單示範條款」為依據。此示範條款以團體為要保人、團體成員為被保險人，將團體壽險定位為由第三人訂立之人壽保險契約，使團體壽險契約受到欠缺保險利益而無效、有無保險法第一○五條之適用及指定、變更受益人之權利人為誰之質疑。其次，團體壽險契約條款中的保險契約構成部分條款、被保險人資格條款、保險契約終止條款、契約轉換權條款、免責條款及不可抗爭條款等亦存在諸多問題，實有檢討予以修正之必要。 因此，本文乃以探討示範條款所涉法律爭議問題為中心，參酌國內學說見解並比較美國判例及美國保險監理官協會所制訂之「團體壽險定義及標準條款模範法案」，對團體壽險契約條款之增訂及修正提出七項建議，包括重新定位團體壽險契約當事人、重視逆選擇防範及被保險人權益保障、明訂兩年不可抗爭期間及團體信用壽險不適用契約轉換權條款及受益人條款、修正個別被保險人保險契約終止之時點及保險人免責事由等，希冀本文之淺見能使示範條款更為完善。 / Group life insurance arises from the thought that employers have the responsibilities to take care of their employees. Until now, group life insurance has become an important part of industries’ risk management plans for distributing and transferring industries’ life and liability risk. Group life insurance insures more than five persons in one policy, and this “group” characteristic makes group life insurance different from general life insurance in many aspects: underwriting, premiums, partly effective and contract clauses. Presently, provisions of group life policies are based on“Model Provisions for Group Yearly Term life Policies”promulgated by competent authority. According to Article 2 of the model provisions, the policyholder is the “group”, and the members of the group are insureds. In other words, group life insurance is entered into by third party. This causes three problems needed to be solved: (1) If the policyholder has no insurable interest in the insured, shall group life insurance be void? (2) Is Article 105 of Insurance Act applicable to group life insurance? (3) Who has the right to designate or change the beneficiary? In addition, there are still some problems in other model provisions including the entire-contract provision, eligibility requirements provision, termination provision, conversion provision, exception clause and incontestability provision. It is necessary to review and revise the model provisions. Therefore, this study focuses on related legal issues of the model provisions. Referring to scholars’ opinions and comparing American verdicts and “Group Life Insurance Definition and Group Life Insurance Standard Provisions Model Act” issued by The National Association of Insurance Commissioners, this study concludes by providing several suggestions in revising the model provisions: (1) The policyholder and the insured should be referred to as members of the group, not “group”. (2) Emphasize on preventing adverse-selection and protecting the insured’s right. (3) Augment incontestable period of two years and a clause which provides that conversion provision and beneficiary provision are not applicable to credit group life insurance. (4) Revise the termination provision and exception clause. Hope these suggestions will make the model provisions more perfect.

在金融市場國際化之趨勢下，各國金融交易參與者極可能受到跨國破產事件的影響。同時，受到金融創新潮流的驅使，非傳統金融工具的商業活動亦構成金融市場重要環節之一，從而探討破產法制對於非傳統金融交易契約之處理方式，實有其重要性。本文以店頭衍生性金融交易市場以及所選取案例為中心，探討跨國破產事件相關議題，包括破產法制對於店頭衍生性金融交易所給予的特殊規定（或在破產法制下承認提前終止與淨額結算條款之效力，以下均統稱為「破產法特殊規定」），以及相關跨國破產事件之可能處理模式或合作途徑。 本文以國內外學術文獻、法院見解之整理為基礎，進行法學分析，並輔以金融實務觀點進行研究，於各相關部分同時探討我國法制。本文分為七章，內容簡介如後。 首先，於第一章說明研究動機、目的、研究方法與架構，同時也限定研究範圍。又因跨國破產事件具多樣性與複雜性，為使本文討論範圍明確與聚焦，故於第二章先行提出具體跨國破產事件之美國與英國案例及其爭議問題，並以其做為本文探討中心與範圍，探討內容即包含破產法制涉及店頭衍生性金融交易之規範實體面議題，以及跨國破產事件處理方式之程序面議題。後續章節將陸續探討上開問題。 第三章簡介店頭衍生性金融交易，以及說明其常見契約結構、相關法律問題。本章同時介紹「單一主契約模式」與「提前終止與淨額結算條款」之概念，學者及實務工作者有謂上開契約條款之功能，包含避免於破產程序中破產管理人選擇性履行或拒絕契約、降低交易對手信用風險、提升未違約方之再避險可能性、減少銀行業之資本計提成本、降低系統性風險等，而其中最具爭議性的降低系統性風險功能，也是目前全球多國破產法制承認提前終止與淨額結算條款具有效性的重要理由之一。本章著重於顯示店頭衍生性金融交易之當事人約定事項與破產法制間之關聯性，此屬於破產法制之規範實體面議題，以便於次一章接續介紹外國破產法制之相關具體內容。本章內容與後續各章均有密切關聯，故有說明之必要。 第四章先說明破產法制之一般原則，再分別於美國、英國、歐盟、日本、以及我國法制下，觀察破產法制對於店頭衍生性金融交易之例外規定（或在破產法制下承認提前終止與淨額結算條款之效力），著重於說明破產法制立法或承認「提前終止與淨額結算條款」效力之現況，並參考外國文獻探討其立法理由是否具有充足正當性，以及其規定是否有修訂或調整之必要。相對於第三章彙整學說及實務觀點以說明「提前終止與淨額結算條款」之功能，本章則援引外國文獻對破產法制立法或承認「提前終止與淨額結算條款」效力之批評，並做出該條款效力於破產法制中至少應調整為受有一定限制之結論，也就是訂有交易提前終止權之暫時凍結期間、於具系統重要性金融機構清理程序中適用股東與債權人共同承擔損失機制、交易雙方善意無偏頗等，以及在我國法制下亦宜採取同等看法。本章最後分析本文第二章案例在破產法制下之實體面問題，同時也藉此試行探討「提前終止與淨額結算條款」在破產法制下的效力範圍以及第二章案例合成型債務抵押債券交易中有關「序位轉換條款」之效力爭議。本文認為美國破產法院、英國法院係分別各自依其破產法制與公共政策對「序位轉換條款」做出效力判斷，各具實體理由；以及「序位轉換條款」在我國法制下應屬有效。 第五章在本論文題旨範圍內，先說明2007年-2009年金融危機後，二十國集團（G20）所提出的國際性指導建議，之後擇要介紹美國與歐盟依循上開建議，對於店頭衍生性金融交易市場所採行的金融改革法規，包含（但不限於）交易執行平台、集中清算、交易資料之申報、對未集中清算交易加強徵提擔保品等管理措施；此外，在跨國交易監理層面上，簡要介紹替代遵循之概念。本章並說明以上規範與跨國破產事件之關係。本章在整體研究架構上的功能有二，一方面是做為第四章破產法規範實體面議題與第六章跨國破產法制程序面議題之連結，也就是觀察美國及歐盟金融改革法令對第四章所述破產法特殊規定之影響，以及金融改革法案所對應第六章目前國際金融市場之實務發展趨勢以及特殊清理架構下之相關規定。另一方面，相對於第六章係探討發生跨國破產事件時之程序處理模式，第五章則是從破產事件發生前之前階段觀察，藉由事前建構市場監理措施及規劃，以期促進跨國破產事件發生時之處理效能。 第六章探討跨國破產事件處理方式之程序面議題。先敘明跨國破產立法所採行的基礎原則理論，包含普及原則、屬地原則、修正式普及原則、現代化屬地原則；同時簡要介紹相關跨國破產法制。繼而說明金融穩定理事會 （FSB）相關建議，以及觀察近期國際金融實務發展。之後，綜結第四章至第六章之內容，按跨國破產事件之實體面議題與程序面議題，對於涉及店頭衍生性金融交易之跨國破產事件，說明本文在相關立法論或處理合作模式層面上所採取之立場。最末，分析本文第二章案例之程序處理問題。 最後，第七章就本論文探討範圍以及第二章所提出之問題，進行總結論，並試行對我國金融市場參與者提出相關建議。 / Abstract Due to globalization of financial markets, it is hard for market participants to avoid the impact arises from cross-border insolvency events. With the trend of financial innovation, non-traditional financial instruments become an important role in financial markets, and it’s necessary to understand the treatment of these instruments under insolvency law systems. This thesis discusses specific legal issues with regard to cross-border insolvency events in over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives financial markets with focus on the relevant cases selected, including the special treatment of OTC derivatives under insolvency law systems and the potential procedures or coordinate ways to deal with the cases. Based on and reference to research of academic papers and court decisions, this thesis discusses issues through legal analysis supplemented with views of financial practice. The relevant parts are also discussed under Taiwan’s law system. This thesis proceeds in 7 chapters briefly described as follows. Chapter 1 explains the objective, purpose, and fundamental structure together with the method used of this thesis. Assumptions and Confines of this thesis are also described in this chapter. Given diversity and complexity of cross-border insolvency events, Chapter 2 attempts to present actual cases for discussion in order to providing the scope and focuses of this thesis. Key finding of the presented cases includes substantive legal issues of insolvency laws applied to OTC derivatives transactions and procedural legal issues of dealing with cross-border insolvency events. Matters aforementioned will be addressed in further chapters. Chapter 3 describes the basic understanding of OTC derivatives and the legal elements of participants’ transaction contracts in market practice. This chapter also describes the concepts of “the single agreement approach” and “close-out netting provisions”. As academic opinions and practical views mentioned, close-out netting provisions encompass the functions of eliminating the risk of “cherry-picking” by a liquidator in the insolvency proceeding, minimizing counterparty credit risk by calculating exposures on a net basis, promoting the possibility of re-hedging transactions, applying lower capital requirements by regulators to refer to netted transactions for bank industry, and reducing systemic risk in the financial system. Insolvency law systems which allow the effectiveness of close-out netting provisions heavily rationalize the legislation as being founded on preventing the threat of systemic risk. While some academic papers argue that the rationalization on the basis of reducing systemic risk is unconvincing or unnecessary for reasons. Chapter 3 primarily concerns the connections between OTC derivatives contracts and insolvency law systems, in the dimension of substantive legal issues. What addressed in this chapter is highly connected with the subsequent chapters. Chapter 4 describes the general principles of insolvency laws at first, and then observes the exclusions of OTC derivatives transactions under insolvency law systems of U.S., UK, EU, Japan and Taiwan respectively, focusing on issues respecting of validity and enforceability of close-out netting provisions. Compared with Chapter 3 which describes the functions of close-out netting stated by advocators, this chapter illustrates challenges or arguments posed by academic papers with different views. Reference to the relevant academic opinions, this thesis considers that the effectiveness of close-out netting provisions shall, at least, be subject to restrictions to a reasonable extent, such as temporary stays on early termination rights as well as on enforcement rights of security interests, application of the bail-in tool in SIFIs’ resolution procedures, and each party’s good faith. The aforesaid views are also proposed to be referenced by Taiwan’s law regime in the future. In the end of this chapter, it analyzes the cases presented in Chapter 2 within the scope of substantive issues of insolvency laws, and concludes that both U.S. bankruptcy court’s ruling and UK courts’ decisions on the flip clause embedded in CDO instruments are correct respectively pursuant to their own insolvency laws and public policies. In addition, this thesis is in the opinion that the flip clause shall be effective under Taiwan’s current insolvency law system. Chapter 5 will first describe the international guidelines suggested by G20 after 2007-2009 financial crisis. It will then go on to introduce the financial regulatory reforms adopted by U.S. and EU following G20’s guidelines, including the mandatory requirements for trading on the regulated platforms, clearing through a central counterparty (CCP), reporting to a trade repository (TR), and exchanging margins for non-centrally cleared OTC derivative transactions. Besides, the concept of substituted compliance is briefly explained herein for implementing the regulatory regimes to cross-border activities. Chapter 5 also observes the connections between the aforesaid regulatory reforms and cross-border insolvency events. Under the structure of this thesis, substantive legal issues in Chapter 4 and procedural legal issues in Chapter 6 are bridged by Chapter 5. While Chapter 6 emphasizes on ex post measures to handle cross-border insolvency events, this Chapter 5 considers ex ante measures that monitor and supervise OTC derivatives markets and that also have been expected to promote ex post measures in case. Chapter 6 addresses the procedural aspects while dealing with cross-border insolvency cases. First, the theoretical principles for cross-border insolvency law are explained, including universality, territoriality, modified universality and modern territoriality. It herein also introduces legislative regimes in relation to UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency and some jurisdictions’ international insolvency laws. Second, it turns to suggestions made by FSB. Third, the recent international trend in market practice is observed. Then, section 4 of this Chapter proposes framework of regulatory aspects and cooperation arrangements to process cross-border insolvency events, comprehensively in the substantive and the procedural dimensions. Lastly, it analyzes the cases presented in Chapter 2 within the scope of procedural issues of insolvency laws. Chapter 7 summaries conclusions on this thesis and on issues raised in Chapter 2. This final Chapter also tries to provide suggestions to our financial market participants in Taiwan.

透過企業併購進行組織調整，能整合資源及促進外部成長，或者取得技術、市場行銷管道或品牌並發揮企業經營效率。而敵意併購普遍被認為可促進「控制權市場」的形成，扮演著公司治理外部機制的重要角色。惟敵意併購在某些情況下可能不具有外部制衡的功能且有害於公司之發展，因此若允許目標公司經營者採取防禦措施，應具有一定的實益。然而我國企業併購法尚欠缺規範敵意併購防禦措施的規定，其他如公司法、證券交易法等相關法規對於敵意併購防禦措施之態度亦不明確，將來若發生相關案例，該如何處置即有疑問，故本文將從比較法的觀點討論各國相關立法，希冀藉此探尋適合我國市場環境的法制政策。 此外，目前國內已有不少研究敵意併購防禦措施之相關文獻，惟多半係概括、整體地介紹，針對交易保護措施類型的防禦措施則少有討論。由於交易保護措施除了有確保併購雙方順利完成合併契約的功能外，在面臨敵意併購時，亦可能具有抵制敵意併購的防禦效果，因此在美國實務上也有不少公司採取交易保護措施作為敵意併購的防禦措施，且在訴訟上爭執交易保護措施合法性的案例亦不在少數；有疑問的是在美國司法實務上，相關案例所發展出來的司法審查標準與其他一般防禦措施所適用的司法審查標準是否有所不同？是否有其他特別因素需要考量？又該等交易保護措施是否適合於我國發展等問題，皆有進一步釐清與分析之必要，此乃筆者撰寫本文的主要動機及研究重點。 本文將以交易保護措施發展較蓬勃之美國法為比較之對象，針對美國實務上常見的交易保護措施（如鎖定選擇權、禁止接觸條款、終止費、表決權拘束契約等）之定義、功能及內容加以介紹，並輔以相關案例具體說明交易保護措施於美國實務上之操作情形，最後配合我國現行法之相關規定，探討 於我國現行法制下適用該等交易保護措施之可行性，希冀未來可作為我國企業經營者採行該等防禦措施之參考依據。 本文共分為六章。 第一章為「緒論」，分為研究動機及目的、研究範圍及研究方法、研究架構等三部分，主要係在介紹本文之基本理念與架構。 第二章是「敵意併購防禦措施之理論與法制政策」。本章分為四節，除了討論是否允許目標公司經營者採行敵意併購防禦措施之議題外，亦介紹比較法上關於敵意併購防禦措施之相關法律規範；最後則以我國現行法已有的相關規範為基礎，綜合比較各國法制政策於我國繼受的可能性，並以此作為本章之小結。 第三章為「美國敵意併購防禦措施之分類」。本章分為二節，以美國司法實務上常見之防禦措施為主，依序介紹有備無患型與臨時抱佛腳型之防禦措施，以及簡略就單純防禦型與交易保護措施型此一分類做介紹，至於交易保護措施型的防禦措施，亦即本文研究重點，將於第四章為進一步之討論。 第四章為「美國交易保護措施之種類與司法審查」。本章分為六節，主要就常見的交易保護措施類型、意義及其在美國司法實務上的運作情形一一加以介紹與分析，其中包含了鎖定選擇權、禁止接觸條款、終止費條款、表決權拘束契約與表決權信託等。 第五章「交易保護措施於我國法制下的適用可能性」。本章分為五節，分別就鎖定選擇權、禁止接觸條款、終止費條款、表決權拘束契約與表決權信託等防禦措施與我國相關法規範加以聯結與分析，並討論該等防禦措施於我國現行法下運作的可能性。 第六章「結論」。

關係企業的經營型態已在我國占有日漸重要的地位，近年來我國公司在外國或大陸地區設立公司之情形亦時有所聞，此二者皆因此連帶引發了勞動法上的問題，究竟雇主可否使勞工在關係企業中不同公司間調職？甚至調職到我國境外之關係企業其他公司？此與傳統上企業內調職的不同點在於，此時勞工於各公司間的調職涉及勞工於不同法人格間的變動，雇主是否當然有此權利，即不無深究之餘地。 基此，本文將從以下幾個面向來探討關係企業內調職之問題：1.在何等情況下構成關係企業？此由於勞動法上並無相關法制之訂定，故需從其他領域實定法著手，又設若從其他領域實定法著手，是否可全盤移植於勞動法亦屬討論範圍；2.關係企業範圍界定後，是否會對於勞動法上的雇主概念造成影響，進一步而言，是影響到勞動契約上雇主概念，抑或是影響到功能性雇主概念，或者，在何種情況下該二者始會受到影響？3.關係企業內調職的概念為何？其與雇主指示權的關係，與企業內調職、派遣、出差等概念究竟有何異同？4.雇主得否事前取得使勞工於關係企業內調職之權利，若是，是在何種情形下雇主始能取得？5.勞動法之終止保護是否能夠擴及於關係企業，若是，是在何種情況下擴及？6.勞工於關係企業內調職後重要勞動條件應該如何因應之問題。 本論文希冀能夠將上述問題一一釐清，而讓勞資雙方能夠清楚了解雙方之權利義務分別為何，防範爭議於未然，共創與共享經濟之價值。

雇主基於一定之經濟上目的，常與勞工在不定期勞動契約中，約定勞工於一定之期間內，必須繼續為雇主提供勞務，不得提前離職。此種最低服務年限約定條款，常見於各行各業之中，且類型繁多，也增加了問題研究的複雜性；因此，本文首重整理歸納實務上已經出現之案例類型，藉以釐清最低服務年限約定條款之定義與性質，作為研究之基礎。 有關最低服務年限約定條款的效力，涉及勞工職業自由與雇主經濟自由之衝突，本文認為應以利益權衡的方式，來判斷最低服務年限約定條款的效力。實務上，基於契約自由原則，率多承認此等條款的法律上效力，並慣於以違約金酌減之方式，來控制最低服務年限約定條款的合理性。不過，本文並不贊同實務通說之見解，另行提出「必要性」與「合理性」的二階段理論，作為最低服務年限約定條款效力的判斷依據。 實務上，最低服務年限約定條款常伴隨一些問題，譬如定型化勞動契約、終止權之限制、違約金約定條款、補償措施返還條款、訓練費用償還條款、選派進修關係等，本文也將在適當之處就此些問題加以論述。 文末，將對於最低服務年限約定條款在我國實務上的現況，作一回顧式的整理，並就相關的議題提出具有展望性的立法建議。

我國公權力對消費定型化契約條款之行政管制，有愈趨嚴密之勢，觀諸國內目前的研究文獻，卻多為個別消費定型化契約類型的研究，針對其整體性的研究文獻卻相當稀少。本篇論文嘗試以較宏觀之角度，從定型化契約條款規制緣由之發展、德國相關契約管制理論之討論，以及契約之法律經濟分析等面向，以現行消費者保護法的規範架構為基礎，以演繹具體之消費定型化契約條款內容控制標準。嗣以此等內容控制標準檢視我國目前有關消費定型化契約條款的行政規制模式，尤其針對定型化契約應記載及不得記載事項的性質，及其相關內容加以分析討論。除此之外，由於我國目前中央主管機關所公告之各類定型化契約應記載及不得記載事項甚多，本文亦嘗試著將這些應記載及不得記載事項予以類型化，並逐一地提出比較評析。 第壹章「緒論」：各國對消費定型化契約條款多有採取立法、行政及司法等相關規制措施加以導正，我國法制（即立法及司法規則）因此亦深受影響，尤其是繼受德國法。惟我國有關消費定型化契約條款行政規制法制的發展則與德國法制完全脫勾，目前係廣泛透過行政立法之方式，發展頗具臺灣特色的管制模式。針對此種運用公權力以積極介入私人間法律關係的發展，從憲法及行政法角度而言，是否違反法治國原則？從民法的契約自由及契約正義而言，是否妥適？公私法彼此間的競合交錯是否造成過度管制的情形？期藉由初步討論能拋磚引玉。 第貳章「消費定型化契約條款管制之發展」：從定型化契約條款規制緣由之發展、德國相關契約管制理論之討論，以及契約之法律經濟分析等面向，探討消費定型化契約條款管為何要加以管制，以及管制所須注意的面向。 第參章「消費定型化契約條款行政規制之發展」：由於立法、司法規制的功能不足，國家遂被進一步地授權以行政手段介入管制。國家藉由行政規制填充、創造私法自治的外圍框架，理論上並非完全無著力空間，也因此造就我國消費定型化契約條款行政規制的發展。而根據我國目前實務，立法者為避免人民權利保障的疏漏，多有授權行政機關針對消費定型化契約條款進行管制的情形，因此傳統論者基於國家應保持中立或公權力不能妨害契約自由等觀點反對行政規制的立場，似未能切中問題重點，本文以為應就「何時適宜動用行政介入手段」、「動用何種行政手段」、「法治國」、「效用」等面向深入討論，並注意所採用的手段是否逸脫消費定型化契約條款的管制緣由。 第肆章「消費定型化契約條款行政規制之種類」：從行政指導、法規命令及行政處分等行政作用面向分述消費定型化契約條款行政規制之種類。 第伍章「違反行政規制之法律效果」：從行政罰及消費者保護官的不作為訴訟分述違反行政規制的法律效果。 第陸章「各類型行政規制之檢討」：針對前兩章消費定型化契約條款行政規制之種類及違反行政規制之法律效果進行檢討，該章是本篇論文的重心。 第柒章「法制上之建議-代結論」：延續第陸章的檢討，對我國現行消費定型化契約條款行政規制法制提出建言。 / With the ongoing changes of official role in the arbitration between the civil contracts, the debate of whether it should be stepping into or reducing is still up in the air. Although both sides have based on profound theories, the administrative authority of ROC still has tighter and tighter control on consumption of standard contract terms. In light of domestic study on such subject, more paper emphasize on individual type of study instead of the comprehensive one. Therefore this paper claims that the administrative authority should aggressively play a role to create the sound framework to provide necessary substances and service to assure the function of the market mechanism. However, its intervention of the contract content freedom should be taken by more conservative approach. Under this circumstance, this study is trying to illustrate the origin and the development of moderation on standard contract terms, also with the related discussion over contract moderation in German, and the analysis in law and economics over civil contracts. Moreover this study elaborates the concrete consumption of standard contract terms under the consumers’ protection regulation architecture. Hopefully we can reexamine the current administrative control over the consumption of standard contract terms, especially for those the standard contract terms should be posted and those should not. We can evaluate the pros and cons about that later. Besides, due to lots of regulation over those should be or not to provisions, this study is also trying to classify all to make comparison and analysis one by one for your own view.

老年所得保障的問題，是所有工業化國家所共有的社會問題。臺灣、德國與美國為了解決這個問題，基本上都是採用所謂的「三層保障的模式」。第一層保障為國家所建立的強制性社會保險制度，第二層保障為企業或雇主所設立的企業退休給付制度，第三層為個人的自我預護（包括儲蓄、保險、置產等）。本文主要是探討第二層的「企業退休給付制度」之法律問題。臺灣的「企業退休給付制度」（也稱之為「企業退休金制度」），是採強制性為主，自願性為輔的雙軌制度，自願性制度所佔比例無足輕重。在強制性制度中的實施型態是採「單數型態」，而且由「單一組織」承擔實施。美國的「企業退休給付制度」稱為「年金（退休金）計劃(pension plan)」，德國的「企業退休給付(betriebliche Altersversorgung)制度」也稱為「企業年金(Betriebsrenten)制度」。這兩個國家向來都是採用自願性制度，「實施型態」與「實施機構」也都是採「複數型態」。 關於企業退休給付的法律保障，臺灣於1984年在勞動基準法中納入「退休規定」，對勞工退休金制度的設立、實施型態、實施機構、財務準備與給付內容皆制定最低的法律標準，然而對於勞工的退休金期待利益如何保障與雇主陷於支付不能時退休金請求權如何保障等重要問題，皆欠缺規定。德國於1974年制定「改善企業退休給付法」，採有限度的立法，對已設立的企業退休給付制度制定最低法定基準，特別注重「退休給付期待利益之保障」與「退休給付支付不能時之保障」；同一年美國也制定「勞工退休所得保障法」，採取全面性的立法，不僅注重「勞工退休給付權利之保障（包括對退休給付期待利益之保障）」，也同樣針對「退休計劃之終止與支付不能的情形」設有特別的保障。 本文主要是以臺灣的「勞基法退休規定」，德國的「改善企業退休給付法」與美國的「勞工退休所得保障法」等法律規定為基礎。針對同一問題，分別探討臺灣、德國與美國的法律制度。第一節首先探討企業退休給付制度之歷史發展，企業退休給付制度究竟如何形成？如何逐步擴展？法律如何回應？在立法之後又面臨何種問題？第二節首先討論退休給付制度的核心法律概念，以及其如何與雇主的其他給付相區別。接著進一步探究勞工請求雇主給付退休金之法律基礎為何？然後再探討企業退休給付之法律性質。第三節分析企業退休給付制度，以何種型態實施，如何運作，在組織上產生何種法律關係。第四節探討企業退休給付的財務準備。第五節以給付為中心，探討企業退休給付的一般法律保障，包括：請求退休金的法律要件為何？請求範圍如何決定？如何與社會保險給付整合？如何支付？在面對通貨膨脹壓力時又如何因應？第六節探討企業退休給付期待利益如何保障之問題，詳細探討德國與美國為何要保障退休給付期待利益？在何種情形下，退休給付期待利益不可喪失？勞工退休時，退休給付期待利益如何實現為退休給付，如何計算其數額？勞工離職時，可否一次結清將來的退休給付權利？勞工轉換工作時，退休金債權是否可隨同移轉？最後一節探討退休給付發生支付不能之情形時，有何解決辦法？第五章比較三國退休給付法律制度有何異同？有何優缺點？並檢討行政院勞工委員會所提的「勞工老年附加年金保險險制度」草案，與「勞工退休金條例草案」之優缺點，並探討我國勞工退休金制度法律改革是否存在其他不同的途徑。？最後一章總結前面各章之研究所得作成結論。 / Old-age income security is a sharing social problem of all industrialized countries. 「Three tiers (pillars) of economic security」 has been used for solving this problem in Taiwan, Germany and U.S.A. The first tier is obligatory social insurance system established by the countries; the second tier is the composition of　“supplementary pension plans” created by companies or employers; the third tier is personal advance arrangements (include saving, purchase of insurance, investment, etc.). This dissertation concentrates on the legal protection of supplementary pension plans.　The supplementary pension plans in Taiwan is a double-track institution. While the voluntary part of it is rather insignificant, this institution is mainly in obligatory part. This obligatory supplementary pension plans is designed to be only one type － defined benefit plans, and there is only one designated funding agency － the Central Trust of China. In U.S.A. the supplementary pension plans used to be called “private pension plans”; in Germany the supplementary pension plans used to be called “company pensions (Betriebsrenten)”.　These two countries adopt voluntary institutions. The types and funding agencies of their supplementary pension plans are plural. In order to protect the rights of pension, the relevant laws were enacted in Taiwan, Germany， and U.S.A. Regulations about employee retirement benefits were included in the “Labor Standards Law” enacted in 1984 in Taiwan.　These regulations created minimum standards for the establishment, requirement of benefit, funding and funding agency, benefit formulas of retirement plans.　However these regulations　lacked protection of pension expectations and rights to pension against insolvency or bankruptcy of supporting employers.　In Germany the relevant regulations about supplementary pension plans are to be found in the “Act on Company Pensions” in force since December 1974.　This Act regulated very limitedly. It established minimum standards for company pensions, especially relating to protection of pension expectations, and pension benefit rights against insolvency of supporting employers. In the same year the “Employee Retirement Income Security Act” of 1974 (ERISA) was enacted in U.S.A..　This comprehensive employee benefit law not only stressed on protection of employee benefit rights (including protecting vesting right), but also created insurance for pension plan terminations. This dissertation mainly compares the legal institutions relating to　supplementary pension　plans in Taiwan, Germany and U.S.A. on the basis of the above statute laws relating to the supplementary pension plans of these three countries. Chapter 1 is the introduction of this research.　Chapter 2、3 and 4 discuss the legal institutions relating to supplementary pension　plans of these three countries. In each section of each chapter the same problems are discussed. Section 1 provides an overview of the historic background of supplementary pension plans and development of relevant laws, including how the supplementary pension plans have formed and expanded, how the law regulated, and problems that have been caused after enactment of the law relating to supplementary pension plans. Section 2 firstly discusses the core legal concept of supplementary pension in each country, and how it differentiates from other benefits of employers. Then this section probes into the legal bases of supplementary pension claims and the characteristics of supplementary pension.　Section 3 analyzes different types of supplementary pension plans, how they operate, and legal relations that have been produced. Section 4 explores pension funding.　Section 5 discusses the general legal protection of pension benefits, including participation, requirement of benefit, payment of benefit. The question of how supplementary pension integrates with social security benefit and counteracts the effect of inflation is also discussed.　Section 6 discusses how the relating laws of supplementary pension plans protect pension expectations, why the laws of Germany and U.S.A. protect pension expectations, when the pension benefit rights are nonforfeitable, how the nonforfeitable benefit is accrued, under which condition a nonforfeitable benefit can cash out, and whether the nonforfeitable benefit is portable when the employee changes the job?　The last section discusses the legal protection against insolvency of employers or termination of pension plans. After comparing the supplementary pension plans and its legal protections of Taiwan, Germany, and U.S.A.，chapter 5 examines advantages and disadvantages of the two recent drafts of supplementary pension plans reforms proposed by CLA (Council of Labor Affairs)in Taiwan. One is “Draft of the Old-age Supplementary Insurance of Employees” , and the other is “Draft of Employee Pension Act “ . The possibilities of having other ways for reforming supplementary pension plans institution of this country is also discussed in this chapter.　The last chapter puts research results of the preceding chapters into a conclusion.