兩罰規定中法律上推定之研究──以營業秘密法第13條之4事實上推定過失為檢討對象

Essay on the Presumption of Law in the Provision of Dual Liability: Based on the de facto Presumption of Criminal Negligence in the Article 13-4 of Trade Secret Act

在經濟犯罪案件中，由於其舉證的困難性，故有以法律推定犯罪事實的存在的方式，以減輕檢察官舉證責任的手法，即法律上推定。譬如我國的營業秘密法第13條之4等兩罰規定中，即以法律推定企業負責人有監督過失。然而此舉可能違反無罪推定原則，故在刑事訴訟法中，是否允許以推定過失，減輕檢察官的舉證責任，即成為一個重要的問題。本文比較日本學說實務後，認為只有在該當合理關聯性、反證的容易性等要件後，才能在不與無罪推定原則衝突的前提下，利用法律上推定。最後，並提出應限縮「因執行職務」的範圍，才能夠適當的利用法律上推定之規定，以減輕檢察官舉證的負擔，也不會賦予企業負責人過度嚴格的義務。

Due to the difficulty of obtaining evidence in the case of economic crimes, the presumption of law is widely applied. For example, in the provision of dual liability, such as the article 13-4 of trade secret act, legislature applies presumption of law to reduce the prosecutor's burden of proof, especially when the prosecutor needs to prove the criminal supervisory negligence of specific responsible person in a company. However, since the presumed criminal negligence may conflict with the presumption of innocence, which has been considered one of the most important rules in criminal procedure, solving this conflict becomes a core issue in criminal procedure law research. The strategy I adopt to analyze this topic is comparing and analyzing theories related to this issue in Taiwan and Japan. By doing comparative law analysis, I consider that the presumed criminal negligence could be allowed when it withstands the following tests: 1. rational connection test, 2. Test of comparative convenience of producing evidence of ultimate fact. Finally, after reflecting the application of presumption of law, to fulfil the goal of reducing prosecutor's burden of proof and not imposing too much obligation to the defendant, I claim that the range of ''in the course of business'' should be seriously restricted.