行政訴訟程序中審理國家賠償事件之容許性──以日本法之觀察為中心

The Permissibility for the Trial of State Compensation under the Administrative Procedure: Concentrating on the Japanese Law

在考量行政訴訟是否有「必要」收回國家賠償訴訟及如何「回歸」時，由於日本國家賠償訴訟與行政訴訟，在外觀上分別適用民事訴訟法與行政事件訴訟法，與我國制度具有類似性，即為本文觀察對象；而因日本訴訟制度採司法一元體制之故，此二訴訟管道究如何於該體系下運作，亦值觀察。亦即，日本法制中，行政訴訟審判權究竟有無，以及若有，在何種條件下容有國家賠償訴訟之空間？而為建立比較基礎，首先將確認國家賠償訴訟在日本法中，究竟是民法事件訴訟或者公法事件訴訟？其次，因該國法院一元化之體系，行政事件訴訟與國家賠償訴訟間是否存有特殊之關連性，亦將予以探究。而本文觀察發現，該國在行政訴訟中審理國家賠償訴訟的可能性相當多樣。有可能是學理上主張，單獨提起公法上當事者訴訟以實踐國家賠償請求，或是合併國家賠償請求，均使行政訴訟得有審理國家賠償訴訟之可能。前述日本法上之多樣性組合，或可提供我國另一種不同之想像。

When considering whether it is necessary that Administrative Procedure should recover the State Compensation Procedure or how to recover it, this paper would focus on the Japanese law due to its similarity with Taiwanese Law which both systems apply the Code of Civil Procedure to State Compensation Procedure and the Code of Administrative Procedure to Administrative Procedure. Besides that, it is also worth observing how those two Procedures operate under the judicial monism adopted by Japanese litigation system. In other word, is there any space for the Jurisdiction of Administrative Procedure to contain State Compensation Procedure? In order to lay the comparative foundation, first, this paper will characterize Japanese State Compensation Procedure is whether Administrative Ligation or Civil Litigation. Second, this paper will observe is there any special connection between Administrative Procedure and Civil procedure under the judicial monism adopted by its litigation system. All in all, this paper concludes that the ways to judge State Compensation Procedure under Administrative Procedure varies. Under doctrinal interpretation, an claim for state compensation may be filed with the Public Law-Related Actions, or joined with it. Therefore, the multiplicity of Japanese litigation system may provide different imagination to Taiwanese one.