探求緊急避險的法理理由－－道德可譴責性、經濟效益和社會公平

Jurisprudential Reasons of Necessity: Moral Blameworthyness, Economic Efficiency and Social Justice

本文從一個緊急避險的案例出發，展開討論緊急避險侵權法抗辯理由的法理基礎。近現代侵權法的理論基礎是過錯責任，但是，過錯責任並不能夠充分解釋緊急避險人賠償受害人的理由，因為避險人在實施避險行為的時候並無主觀上的過錯。首先，本文揭示過錯責任的道德含義以及在解釋緊急避險時面臨的困境；其次，本文展示緊急避險抗辯理由中蘊涵的經濟理由，以及經濟分析與道德分析的衝突；最後，本文介紹基於矯正正義的緊急避險新道德分析。本文不是想要斷定緊急避險應該遵循的法理理由，而是想要解釋三種法理理由的內在含義，及其每種理由在法律解釋中的理論局限。

This article begins with a tort case of necessity to discuss the jurisprudential reasons of necessity in tort action. Fault liability is the theory foundation of modern tort law, but fault liability cannot explain the reason why the defendant who takes action to avoid emergency has to compensate the victim. In the first place, the article reveals the moral meanings of fault liability and the dilemma whether to apply fault liability in necessity occasion. Second, the article sets out the economic reason of necessity, and the conflict of the economic analysis and moral analysis. At last, this article introduces the new moral analysis of necessity based on corrective justice. The object of the article is not to confirm the jurisprudential reasons which should apply to necessity, but to explain the internal meanings and limitations of the three jurisprudential reasons.