金融海嘯至少證明了兩件事：1.企業沒有不倒神話、2.看不見的風險才是風險。前者尚未結束，後者還在發生。 美國在1934年賣出第一張「董監事與重要職員責任險」保單（Directors and Officers’ Liability Insurance，簡稱D&O Insurance），到我國1996年10月9日財政部核准由外商(美國環球產物保險公司)推出第一張D&O，中間相距了近62年，而我國推出上開保單的前三年間僅不過十七家公司投保，其漠視之程度與曲高和寡之現象可見一般。 根據投資人保護中心的統計，到2008年6月底為止，投保中心替投資人提出集體訴訟向問題公司求償金額已達240億元，而參加集體訴訟求償的投資人也高達六萬四千人。然而按保險公會統計資料顯示，國內的董監責任險投保規模尚不大，在2003年總投保的保費規模只有2.49億元，到了2007年總投保的保費規模也才6.23億元，但是國內的董監責任險賠款率的比重卻直線上升，2003年這項賠款率才只有0.59％，但近年則已跳升直逼12％，等於保險業每承做十件董監責任險，就有一件多會面臨求償。 2001年美國安隆案（Enron）爆發金融危機（西北大學教授說：『這是有史以來美國人對資本主義比對政治信心還低落的時刻』），此為「公司治理」這門近年顯學正式拉開序幕，之後接二連三金融醜聞、財務弊案不斷，迫使政府、大眾投資人與企業高度警覺的至少對三個議題感到興趣：一是「企業內部資訊必須透明化」；二是「代理問題下經理人應該受到監督」；三是「盡責的董監事與重要職員應該受到保護」。 2003年敝人因工作關係向企業界登門推廣D&O Insurance，儘管從簡報的過程與互動中清晰可見D&O Insurance被需求的殷切，但往往在論及保單條款複雜的設計與風氣未開的雙重前題下，2002年我國通過「證券投資人暨期貨交易人保護法」、2003年成立投資人保護中心(僅需20位投資人授權即可由投資人保護中心提出團體訴訟)、投資人保護中心所提之訴訟，訴訟標的一億元以上免裁判費（2009年4月29日下修為一千萬，以一審裁判費需繳1％計算，即繳交裁判費由一百萬元大幅降至十萬元）、及免擔保假扣押等有利武器下，無異對投資人興訟撞開方便之門，同時為董監事及重要職員投下一顆不定時的深水炸彈、2006年證券交易法修正（要求公開發行公司應設立獨立董事、主張舉證責任之倒置---舉證責任由投資人轉移至經營管理階層。使經營管理層陷入「舉證之所在，敗訴之所在」的下風。）、令人聞之色變的「內線交易」定義模糊不明及罰則的大大加重（證交法第157條）--如果因為內線交易而「損及證券市場穩定者，加重其刑二分之一」，最高可以判20年有期徒刑，外加7.5億元罰金。這個刑度是我國除了死刑、無期徒刑以外最重的罪，和美國內線交易罪的25年有期徒刑也很接近（賴英照說法—從內線交易到企業社會責任第14頁），在如此種種足以為「董監事暨重要職員責任保險」推波助瀾的具體氛圍下，2009年止本國上市櫃公司投保者仍只有區區六百多家之譜，相較於英美國家90%的投保率相去甚遠。顯見D&O Insurance在我國未來的發展空間仍大，也可說，待努力及探討的地方甚為遼闊。 董事、監察人與重要職員肩負了許多證券交易法、公司法及民刑法上的責任與義務，而敵意併購中目標公司為了捍衛經營權，在策略應用上為了出奇不意的效果，往往需要機密性地進行，以免增加更多風險，而就在董監事與重要職員最需要D&O Insurance給予適時的倚靠與保障時，這張保單是否不負所託的展現它存在的價值？本文以實務個案探究之。 從敵意併購中目標公司的角度檢視D&O Insurance，本文提及諸多觀點，提綱挈領地針對公司治理、保單條款、及企業責任等部分提出建議，期能使保險公司從「保費低廉、理賠迅速」轉為「積極輔導、降低風險」的經營模式，提高相關人員對本保單接受度，進而由被動的接受到主動的保單設計，共創更完善的金融保險體制。 / The financial tsunami had proved that there is no corporation can exist forever and the invisible risk is the most important kind of risk. Until now, they are still occurring. The first Directors and Officers’ Liability Insurance policy (D&O Insurance) was sold in U.S.A. 1934. In Taiwan, the first D&O Insurance was sold in October 9, 1996. We can find out that D&O Insurance is ignored in Taiwan. Based on the data of Investor Protection Center in June 2008, the amount of the claims which were aroused by it can reach NT 240 billion. And the number of the investors can reach 64,000 people. Besides, based on the data of Insurance Association, the insurance premium in 2003 reached 249 million, in 2007 reached 623 million. Thus we can find out that D&O Insurance is not popular in Taiwan. But the loss run is getting more and more. For example, in ten policies, there is a one case will make a claim. In other words, the compensation rate can reach 12%. Since 2001, the Enron case aroused attention of the government, the investment and operators in U.S. Furthermore, the government had promoted related rules to increase the directors’ and officers’ liability. In 2003, I had visited corporations and promoted D&O Insurance. Although the process of briefing and interaction can find out the strong demand of policy, but they had lower will to buy it. It might content several reasons, for examples, clauses are too complex and difficult to understand. Rising claims activity, including lawsuits by investors, tougher policy standards and coverage disputes, is the latest developments in the D&O insurance arena. As a result, some carriers have added limits to policies. The directors and officers bear liability of Securities and Exchange Act, Company Act, Civil Code. When the target company tries to protect the right of management against the hostile takeover action, they sometimes have to take any tactic in private and might also be faced more risk. Could D&O Insurance distribute the risks which are aroused from the defense in the hostile takeover action? This article will study on the case and try to find the answers. We use the angle of the target company to inspect the function of D&O Insurance and hopefully try to amend it with the suggestion in the context. The function of D&O Insurance could be the key of corporate governance or distribution risks. For example, when the carriers provide the policy, we truly hope they could also provide positive solution to help the target company. Furthermore, the target company could participate in the design of policy.