論我國消費者保護法對於不當銷售行為之行政監督——以日本「色誘」銷售比較為中心

A Study on the Administrative Supervision of the Consumer Protection Act for Improper Sale Behavior: Focusing on the Comparison with Seductive Commercial Tricks in Japan

隨著消費型態日新月異，企業經營者假借「居家安檢」、「法令宣導」或「企業徵才」之名，行「真銷售」之實的案例層出不窮。因各種千奇百怪的行銷手法不斷翻新，遊走於法律邊緣，其中以娘子軍團「假感情」之名，行銷售之實的事件最為荒誕。近年來隨著未婚人口比例大幅攀升，此類消費案件有日益嚴重趨勢，惟國內對此一議題之探討，大都專注在詐欺取財刑事判決之研究，鮮少立於消費者保護之立場作論述。是以本文嘗試就案例及其衍生之不當銷售行為法律關係，從消費者保護、行業導正及民事法規逐一分析，從而印證我國針對契約不當條款之控制，民法傳統意思表示瑕疵規範顯不足以因應。由於公平交易法係以市場交易秩序為規範之特性，在消費者面對業者利用不符合社會倫理手段、隱匿交易重要訊息，或虛偽不實引人錯誤等欺罔行為從事交易時，無法比附援引，屢屢形成法律漏隙，進而導致消費者求償無門。以往基於「私法自治」，國家行政權不介入，惟此類紛爭案件一再出現，造成社會交易秩序之不安定，此時國家行政權對上開行為是否仍袖手旁觀，即有一併討論之必要。此類不當銷售行為在鄰國日本於80年代便曾大量出現，型態與我國情況極其類似，該國藉由「消費契約法」及「特定商取引法」中「不實告知」、「迷惑」及「威迫困擾」等規範作為情感因素判斷之依據，並以公私法二元之立法技術統合規範，賦予中央主管機關整合各地消保事務之權限加以解決之模式，發揮行政監督之功能，極具實益與成效，頗值借鏡。最後本文以防範未然之觀點，就日本法制之觀察，及我國實務操作之困境，提出建議事項及具體修法內容芻議，作為主管機關之參考，更盼關心此一議題之論者批評指正。

In order to attract consumers to purchase goods or services, nowadays the marketing strategies have become endlessly divergent and outlandish. With the sharp growth of the population of single males in recently years, it is astonishing to see more and more incidents in which the “gold digger” promotes the sale transaction by the false love and affection. Due to the fact that the criminal offense could hardly be constituted by this type of fraudulent behavior, the victims in such cases usually seek relief through the civil compensation claim. However, the civil proceeding takes a long time so that the fraudsters may arrange a fraudulent conveyance for hiding their assets. As a result, the victims cannot acquire the compensation and thus the timely intervention of administrative supervision is essential. Accordingly, this article begins by reviewing some selected cases from this type of civil litigations and finds that the court’s reasoning seems somewhat contradictory to the legislative intent of the Consumer Protection Act in Taiwan. Furthermore, this article suggests that Japan’s “Seductive Commercial Act” should be a good legislative model for Taiwan to reform its legal framework in dealing with this type of fraudulence. In particular, the 2009 Amendment of the Act on Specified Commercial Transactions in Japan categorizes these cases as “door-todoor sales” and allows the competent agency to conduct an investigation, and which in turn leads to issuing an order for making corrections or other administrative sanctions with respect to the “misinformation or misrepresentation in sale”, “confusing sale”, and “undue sale”. Finally, this article summarizes the focal points of the newly amended Consumer Protection Act in Taiwan, analyzes its unresolved problems, and presents a legislative proposal for resolving the aforementioned disputes.