電子金融憑證機構之民事責任

The Civil Liability of Electronic Finance Certificate Authority

電子商務之發展，不論就商人與商人之間，或商人與企業之間，近年來均蓬勃發展，創造出鉅額的交易量。電子商務中之法律制度，特別是憑證機構的責任基礎，攸關維持健全與良好之金融秩序，實為電子商務之成敗關鍵所在。各國對於電子金融之憑證機構，莫不於法制上有詳盡及完善之規範，期能保障一國之財政金融體系之健全與發展。有關電子金融憑證機構之民事責任，參照電子簽章法第14 條規定係採取過失責任主義之立法，並得舉證無過失而免責，此等舉證責任倒置之規定，實為對於消費者無法舉證求償的一種法律風險分配之制度，能免除消費者無法舉證據以求償之情形。我國電子金融之憑證機構之組織，係採行多階層之憑證機構組織，並以技術中立為立法原則。然而，有關多階層憑證機構之民事責任，本即於各個階層中之責任基礎應該沒有差異才是，但相關法規中卻又採行契約之債務不履行之制度，顯然在法制上未能一貫，造成電子金融之憑證機有的須負過失責任之基礎，有些卻是負債務不履行之責任而已，形成責任基礎的紊亂與不一致，也影響憑證用戶的權益甚距。就此憑證機構之民事責任型態，如何能妥當地規範憑證機構與其用戶間之責任基礎，自有釐清之必要。一般而言，電子簽章法所訂立以過失責任為基礎之侵權行為，相對於電子金融憑證機構之法令採行的債務不履行制度，顯然過失責任能以舉證免責之制度較能保障憑證用戶之權益，並能促進電子商務之發展。電子金融憑證機構相關之規範顯然將債務不履行與過失責任混淆，自有釐清及探究之必要。 Development of electronic commerce, whether it between merchants and businessmen, or between merchants and enterprises in recent years are booming, creating a huge volume of transactions. E-commerce in the legal system, particularly the responsibility of certificate-based organizations, stake maintain a healthy and good financial order, in fact, the key to the success of e-commerce. States for evidence of e-finance institutions, everyone in a detailed and perfect the legal system of norms, can protect the integrity of the financial system and financial development of a country. Civil liability in respect of electronic financial certificate authority, referring Electronic Signature Law Article 14 series adopt legislative negligence doctrine, and may prove no fault Disclaimer These provisions responsibility inversion of the burden of proof, in fact, the consumer cannot prove the claim a legal system of risk allocation, can relieve consumers cannot give evidence to the claim circumstances. Organization's electronic certificate of financial institutions our country, the Department adopted multiple levels of the organization certificate authority and legislative principles of technology neutrality. However, the civil liability in respect of multi- class certificate authority , this being the responsibility of each hierarchy is the foundation should be no difference , but the relevant laws and regulations adopted in the system but does not fulfill contract obligations trip , apparently in the legal system failed to consistently cause some evidence of local e-finance basis of negligence of the need to bear some of the responsibility but it is a debt of non-performance of it, form the basis of liability is inconsistent with the disorder also affects the user's credentials from the very interests Civil liability for this type of certificate authority, how can the normative basis of responsibilities between the institutions and their user credentials properly, necessary to clarify its own. Fault- based tort liability , with respect to the statute of electronic financial institutions to adopt a certificate of non-performing debt regime ,apparently fault liability and disclaimers in the system as compared to the burden of proof to protect users ' interests entered into evidence in general, the Electronic Signature Act and promote the development of e-commerce . Standardize electronic evidence related financial institutions and non-performing debt is clearly negligence confusion, clarify and explore its own necessary.