在「公司法自一九二九年十二月二十六日制定公布以來，歷經十一次修正。資為因應資訊科技時代，順應企業國際化，協助企業提升全球競爭力，追求企業永續發展，並保護股東基本權利，推動建立完善之公司治理制度，營造良好公司法制環境」之立法總說明下，二００五年六月二十二日總統令公布增刪修正條文共十五條之公司法部份修正條文。 近年來電子科技發展迅速，法律制度亦需配合調整，以善用嶄新科技（如網路）所帶來的便利，同時解決此種便利所衍生的問題。在表決權相關法制方面，電子科技之影響無遠弗屆，從會議召開方式、資訊揭露方式、至投票表決方式，均產生相當衝擊，因此如何結合科技與法律，成為公司治理之重要議題。 公司法新增定之通訊投票制度，使股東能更便利行使其表決權，有助於公司治理，而「公司民主」亦因而得以落實，從而值得深入研究。本論文就公司法所增訂之通訊投票制度，加以剖析，輔以與美國及日本立法例之比較，檢視新法內容不合理及不足之處，並進而提出修改之建議，以供下次修法之參考，期使通訊投票制度在未來能更臻完善。 至於立法論上虛擬股東會是否適宜取代實體股東會，虛擬股東會所帶來的時間跟費用的節省也許看起來很吸引人，如果可以不用召開傳統實體股東會，勢必能免除繁瑣的作業程序，節省大量人力、金錢及時間，特別是當議程上的項目並不具爭議性時，但是考慮採取這些程序的公司必須把這些益處跟股東可能反對的潛在負面後果相衡量，也就是股東對於取消傳統股東會，使他們喪失可以接觸經營階層與其溝通的機會，可能會抱持負面觀感，故公司無法只著眼於時間及金錢的節省即貿然考慮採行。然這些危險並不是斷然拒絕虛擬會議可能帶來的益處的理由，尤其是可以使更多股東參與這點，所以仍應在維持現行實體股東會外，結合網路轉播實體集會，且讓遠距收看者也能藉由以電子郵件提出問題參與，加上（或是）同步電子投票，以利用科技便利股東參與股東會，提高股東對股東會之參與。一言以蔽之，如前所述，在股權分散的公開發行公司虛擬會議不應完全取代實體會議，除非能設計出一個電子方式能等同經營者對散戶股東面對面負責(face-to-face accountability)，而且也能提供現行實體會議所具有的商議機會（deliberation），才宜改以虛擬會議取代傳統實體集會之股東會。 / Stockholder meetings are the most important means for corporations to reach decisions, and are also how stockholders participate in the management of corporations, thus it is a significantly important legal issue to make sure stockholders can express their viewpoints of how to run the corporation through exercise of stockholder rights and stockholder meetings. Moreover, it is very common that one person is the stockholder of several or even hundreds of corporations nowadays. Though it is inevitable that several corporations conduct stockholder meetings at the same day for there are far more corporations than the dates capable to conduct stockholder meetings, it is quite obvious that corporation conduct meetings during the same period of time intentionally. It might be a result of preventing some nasty stockholders disturbing meetings through choosing the same day conducting stockholder meetings to decrease the risk, but it deprives other stockholders of attending stockholder meetings and consequently sacrificing their stockholder rights. There is proxy voting for stockholders who are unable to attend stockholder meetings, but it has pitfalls in practice and for stockholders it is not that safe comparing with voting directly. In order to increase the ways for stockholders to vote in stockholder meetings, there is a change in corporation that is to add article 177-1: “The voting power at a shareholders' meeting may be exercised in writing or by way of electronic transmission, provided, however, that the method for exercising the voting power shall be described in the shareholders' meeting notice to be given to the shareholders if the voting power will be exercised in writing or by way of electronic transmission. A shareholder who exercises his/her/its voting power at a shareholders meeting in writing or by way of electronic transmission as set forth in the preceding Paragraph shall be deemed to have attended the said shareholders' meeting in person, but shall be deemed to have waived his/her/its voting power in respective of any extemporary motion(s) and/or the amendment(s) to the contents of the original proposal(s) at the said shareholders' meeting.” Electronic technology has improved a great deal these years, therefore legal system has to change or amend to make use of the new technology e.g. internet as well as solve problems stemmed from new technology. Concerning the regulations of voting right there is a great impact of electronic technology from the way of conducting meetings, to the way of exposing information and voting, thus to combine technology and law is an important issue in corporate governance. Electronic voting has been put into practice in the United States for a long time, but it is not as successful in our country, and to date there has been only one company, Taiwan Integrated Shareholder Service Company, to adopt electronic voting, therefore it is worth studying why The United States can promote electronic voting successfully and then have a better understanding of what obstacles they have encountered initially to prevent our country from making the same mistake.

我國公司法在94年6月22 日通過增訂修正條文，新增通訊投票制度，並賦予股東提案權及董事、監察人提名制度。行政院金融監督管理委員會配合公司法新增通訊投票相關規定，於94年12 月15 日發布修正公開發行股票公司股務處理準則，以使公開發行公司採行書面或電子方式行使表決權時之股務作業有所依循，使我國上市上櫃公司正式跨入股東會通訊投票時代。不過法令修正後逾三年除台灣期貨交易所股東會採用通訊投票外，並無其他上市上櫃公司採行，使通訊投票制度徒託空言。 97年6月13日共計有637家上市櫃公司選在同一天召開，過度集中化的結果，不僅股東分身乏術無法參與公司一年一度股東會，也嚴重影響小股東參與監督、瞭解公司經營等權益。 股東會是小股東實踐股東權益及落實股東行動主義最佳的場合，也是公司實行公司治理具體表現。但近幾年股東會撞期情況始終未獲改善，為有效解決此一問題金管會證期局積極宣導通訊投票制度的優點，希望上市上櫃公司採行通訊投票制度，讓股東在親自出席和委託出席之外，多增加一項參與股東會方式。 股東會通訊投票制度亦新增股東會提案權和董監事提名董監事制度，讓少數股東權益能擴大參與公司決策與經營。我國通訊投票制度雖然已有法源和運作平台，但企業普遍對此制度仍不熟悉，未來要擴大推行，有賴主管機關政策輔導和提出獎勵措施，初期如果能鼓勵大型企業或法人持股比重較高公司帶頭做起，則我國通訊投票制度則可望步上正軌。 通訊投票制度最早由美國開始，目前英國、日本、澳洲、香港等國皆已實施多年，我國起步並不算晚，實施股東會通訊投票不僅與國際接軌對我國企業推動公司治理和股東行動主義亦有正面評價。

2004年後我國陸續爆發博達科技、訊碟等弊案，已重擊原已推動之公司治理成效，更突顯了公司治理除設置獨立董監事制度外，應另循其他管道之必要性。其中為強化企業內部機制， 2005年6月即修法引進「股東提案制度」，增訂公司法第172條之1之規定，以響應「股東行東主義」之潮流趨勢，建構並強化股東行使股東權之機制。此制度完成立法後迄今已近4年，歷經具體實務個案之洗鍊，已逐漸顯現適用上之爭議。基於此因素，本研究擬藉由對實務上具體案例所衍生爭議之觀察，重新檢討公司法第172條之1之立法是否存有疏漏或失當之處，進而歸納提供建言，冀望能建制符合我國國情之股東提案制度。本論文之研究架構安排如下： 第一章為緒論。針對本論文之研究動機、研究目的提出說明，並就研究範圍限制及本論文所採之方法予以敘明。 第二章為公司治理趨勢下股東行動主義之展現。包含探討公司治理、股東行動主義與股東提案權關聯性及我國公司法第202條與股東行動主義之關係，並就我國股東行動主義下之2005年公司法相關修正作一簡要說明，以期初步了解股東提案之概念。 第三章為股東提案權在外國法制之發展。因我國股東提案權係參考美、日立法例，本章將簡要介紹美國、日本及我國股東提案權制度，同時對照本制度於美國、日本、台灣之相異處，以比較法方式作初步分析，以作為後續分析我國實務個案時，修正方向之參考。 第四章為我國引進股東提案權之案例評析。擬就我國股東提案制度於2005年引進後4年內，於實務個案公司之落實情形；並將嘗試從個案整理出現行法令缺失，並提出本文見解及解決之道。 第五章為股東提案權在我國實行結果之探討。藉由結合國外法制比較及分析個案實務運作上所產生之不足處，並提出立法上之建議，盼能建構出一套適合我國之股東權制度，以促進股東行動主義在我國之實踐，以完善我國之公司治理。 第六章為本文之結論。綜合各章之論述，再予以精要整理，最後提出本論文之研究心得與意見。

我國於94年6月22日公布修正後之公司法，正式賦予公司召開股東會時，得採行書面或電子方式供股東行使表決權之法律依據，期能使我國之公司治理與股東權益維護能與國際接軌；惟「股東會電子投票」制度，歷經元大京華證券股份有限公司、台灣總合股務處理股份有限公司及台灣集中保管結算所股份有限公司三個平台之建置，仍然未被各上市、櫃公司廣為採用，即使偶有採用者，其投票總權數占總股份之比例多數未及1%，顯示成效不彰。另2010年10月的亞洲公司治理協會(Asian Corporate Governance Association)年會，提出了最新一份的「CG Watch」報告，在這份報告中，ACGA指出我國推動股權權益的狀況上較前次調查類似，並未有太大改善，比如公司對國外投資人「通訊投票」、「分割投票」權益的行使，相關法規及配套仍不夠完備，而針對「通訊投票」得分，在歷次的評分中，我國都是敬陪末座，可以說，這幾年來此一核心問題並未被重視並獲得具體的改善。 基此本研究將以股東會通訊投票之法令、制度為經，佐以實務之見解為緯，參考外國經驗，藉由分析現行之問題並勾勒未來推動之建議供各界參考。本研究除分析我國股東會之基本概念、表決權行使方式、委託書之使用，並藉由對美、日兩國股東會制度及實務之探討，一窺國際之現況及未來發展之趨勢。另針對我國股東會通訊投票制度與現況進行背景說明，並介紹我國通訊投票下書面投票與電子投票之架構及現況，最後分析我國電子投票採用率偏低之原因。 此外，針對美、日、台三國股東會通訊投票制度分別由法規制度面、股東權益面、公司執行面及電子投票實務面進行比較，最後並提出對相關主事者之建議及對後續研究者未來研究方向之建議，以期經由各界之腦力激盪，共同為我國的資本市場國際化而努力。 / The amendment of Taiwan Company Act in June 22nd, 2005, upon its release, granted each shareholder the legitimate right to cast his/her vote by both written and electronic means in shareholders’ meetings. This amendment is menat to bring Taiwan’s corporate governance and shareholder rights in line with the international practice. However, with the limited use of no more than 1% voting rights of most listing and over-the-counter (OTC) companies on the three voting forums established by Yuanta Core Pacific Securities Co., Ltd., Taiwan Integrated Shareholder Service Company and Taiwan Depository & Clearing Corporation, the attempt has been proven unsuccessful. In addition, the latest “CG Watch” report, submitted during the 2010 Asian Governance Association annual conference held in October, has suggested that, similar to the previous reports, shareholder rights of Taiwan-based companies have not been improved outstandingly. For instance, the exercise of “postal voting” and “vote splitting” upon foreign investors of Taiwan-based companies has been restricted due to the flaws in the domestic voting system and regulations. Also, in the report, a constant low rating in “postal voting” for the Taiwan-based companies simply hints that the core issue has never been properly valued nor concretely improved. Based on the suggestions in the previous paragraph, this research paper provides an overview of the laws and the regulations of the postal voting system. The paper also includes opinions on practical needs and comparison from foreign experiences. By means of analyzing our current issues, the research draws an outline of the propositions for trends of the future development. Apart from analyzing the basic concepts of shareholders’ meetings held by some Taiwan-based companies, exercise of voting rights, and use of proxy forms, the research also peeks into the current situation around the globe and the future trends by consulting the system and the practical needs of shareholders’ meetings in the U.S. and Japan. As for the postal voting system and the current situation in Taiwan, the research provides a background illustration by introducing the structure and the current status of printed ballot voting and electronic voting under our postal voting framework. In conclusion, the paper points out the reasons for limited use of electronic voting in Taiwan. Finally, the research measures postal voting systems in the U.S., Japan and Taiwan from aspects of the laws and regulations, the shareholder rights, the corporate execution and the practical needs. In the end, in order for the effort of internationalization upon domestic capital market, the research eventually proposes the solutions for the related personnel in charge and the follow-up research direction for future researchers.

一般而言，股東會議程所有議案資訊必須事前揭露給全體股東，提供股東充分資訊，其方能在充分瞭解下作成投票決定。惟我國公司法長久以來承認股東有臨時動議與議案修正之權利，允許出席股東就第一七二條第五項規定除外事項之其他一切事項，在股東會現場提出臨時動議或原議案之修正，此舉不但將形成股東會議程資訊之漏洞，復以實務一般認為只要未違反第一七二條第五項之規定，股東可以在現場以臨時動議提議召開股東臨時會針對法定除外事項進行決議，或在同一議題下，可以提出任何修正案，而架空第一七二條之一股東提案權制度所寓有之資訊揭露功能。在無法獲得充分資訊之下，股東應當如何行使表決權，尤其未出席股東以書面或電子方式事前行使表決權時，更是需要充分資訊，否則一旦面對臨時動議或議案修正時，其表決權將依法視為棄權，更進一步衍生出表決權操縱和應否親自出席之問題，橫生枝節，臨時動議與議案修正之突襲性問題，亟待解決。 因此，參考美國、日本、德國、英國、香港、韓國和中國大陸公司法制，公司法應明文要求將股東會議程之主要內容或要領記載於召集通知中，股東會不得就召集通知所未記載之議案進行決議，股東如欲發表任何意見，應循事前提案權提出，而非在現場提出臨時動議或議案修正突襲其他股東。因此，本文建議禁止在現場提出任何臨時動議或議案修正。 / Generally speaking, the agenda of general meeting, including all motions, should be disclosed to all shareholders of the company in advance of a general meeting to provide them with sufficient information to vote (informed voting). However, according to Taiwan Company Act, shareholders have right to move extemporary motions or amendments all but any items as set forth in §172(5) hereof at the meeting. This will not only come to be a loophole resulting from blank statements in a notice of a general meeting, but also sideline the information disclosure function by implication of shareholder proposal in §172-1, because the court hold that the shareholder are entitled to move an extemporary motion to call a meeting to make a resolution on exclusion items in §172(5), or any amendment under the same subject. Thus shareholders are unable to vote without sufficient information, especially who cast their vote through writing or electronic transmission without participating in person in advance of the meeting. In case of extemporary motions or amendments, shareholders who cast vote through writing or electronic transmission shall be deemed to withhold their voting power. This result would bring some issues of manipulation of voting power and whether shareholders who have cast their vote through writing or electronic transmission should participate in person afterwards or not. However, extemporary motions and amendments with surprising nature shall be or shall not be, that is the question. In order to deal with this problem, the main component or general nature of items in the agenda of a general meeting shall be stated in the notice, and only the items stated in the notice could be validly passed at the general meeting by referring to the Company Act of the U.S., Japan, Germany, U.K., Hong Kong, South Korea, and Mainland China. If shareholders are willing to express their opinions, they should propose to ask to put in the agenda in advance of the meeting, instead of moving extemporary motions and amendments to surprise the others. This study suggests that no extemporary motion or amendment shall be allowed to move at the general meeting.

由國內相關研究來看，探討委託書之相關議題，如委託書對於股東的財富影響、委託書所造成之案例等研究，其資料頗為豐富，是一個多實證研究及多社會興趣的主題，且近年來，有關委託書徵求所引發之經營權爭議亦是層出不窮。故本論文主要乃將偏向為國內委託書制度尚可以改善之方向進行探討，將以我國委託書制度與國外制度之比較之差異及可以參酌改進之地方做一論述。另發現針對近年來國內興起股東會電子化之規範及成效研究部份更是微乎其微，是故亦將股東會電子化之成效研究納入本論文主軸，期待以提供一個簡單、便利、安全及隱密的電子平台，使投資人的意見可充分反應，亦無遭篡改之虞，亦可使國內近年來委託書之爭議有所改善，再輔以近年來較具爭議之委託書競爭行為分析，以說明委託書之規範若不嚴謹時將對小股東造成之損害。 / During these few years, proxy has been a tool to manipulate the outcome of hostile takeover. In this thesis wet want to evaluate the possibility of implementing electronic voting for proxy and comparing different proxy regulation of other developed countries. The main reason for implementing electronic vote and advantages will be explained in the thesis and the after effect will also be discussed.

我國於2005年時，為促進我國公司治理之發展，提升股東行使表決權之便利性以鼓勵股東參與股東會之議決，落實股東民主與股東行動主義之精神，並因應我國上市櫃公司股東會開會日期過度集中之問題，引進於國外行之有年之通訊投票制度，使股東除得選擇親自出席或委託他人出席股東會外，尚得選擇使用書面或電子投票方式行使表決權，立意甚為良善。然此制引進至今，實務上自願採用之公司甚少，使此制度之優點無法充分發揮。 　　為檢討我國通訊投票制度使用率偏低之問題，本文先自公司治理原則之觀點，探討股東參與對公司治理原則而言之意義，並建立通訊投票制度與公司治理原則之關聯，突顯通訊投票制度之價值。其次，介紹美國、英國、日本、歐盟等之通訊投票法制與實務運作情形，以了解國際脈動、發掘我國制度之現存問題，並藉由國外實施通訊投票制度之經驗，反思我國通訊投票制度未來之發展方向。 　　另就我國通訊投票之法制與實務部分，與股東資訊權有關之規範，如我國召集通知之發送或公告時點、召集通知之記載與臨時動議、召集通知之電子化、議事手冊及會議資料之製作與周知方式等，應朝更透明化之方向發展，並應使股東得以更直接之方式獲取相關資訊。另一方面，亦應使符合一定條件之公司負有提供英文版召集通知與議事手冊之義務，以利機構投資人妥適行使表決權。 　　其次，就通訊投票之規範上，公司法第177條之1與第177條之2之規範內容，有諸多過度遷就股務作業之規定，有所不妥，書面或電子投票之方式與作業程序規範密度亦有不足。另在電子投票制度上，未能顧及電子投票方式之即時性與互動性，僅採「事前的」電子投票制度，亦過於保守。此外，與通訊投票相關之制度，如分割行使表決權制度、董監候選人提名制、股東提案權制度等，亦宜一併檢視。 　　本文認為，為符合現今國際潮流、提升我國公司治理、促進電子投票制度之使用，前揭我國規範之未盡之處，未來皆有進行全盤檢討並加以修正之必要。