2020年公司法與證券交易法發展回顧

Developments in the Law in 2020: Corporate Laws and Securities Exchange Laws

2020年的公司法與證券交易法（下稱「證交法」）在立法層面的變革相對有限，主要修正與證券投資人及期貨交易人保護法（下稱「投保法」）下保護機構提起代表訴訟與董監裁判解任訴訟有關，但在司法層面與行政層面卻有不少發展，在在影響我國公司治理法制下股東與董事的相對權限與責任。本文首先評析證交法與投保法的修正；其次評析最高法院大法庭對證交法不合營業常規罪作成的統一解釋；然後以經濟部對章程自由範圍兩號不一致的解釋以及最高法院最新對股東與董事表決權拘束契約的表態，突顯我國實務對擴大股東權限的保留立場；接著以最高法院對董事資訊權以及商業判斷法則適用於特別背信罪的相關判決，突顯我國實務對董事的相對信賴；最後以大同經營權事件──特別是當中的董事提名人選剔除事件以及經濟部擴張股東召集股東會條件的解釋，突顯股東與董事權限的此消彼長仍存在許多待解問題。整體而言，2020年公司法與證券交易法在實務層面的發展，提供吾人更多素材省思如何設計股東與董事間的相對關係。

Changes in Taiwan’s corporate laws and securities exchange laws are relatively limited in the year of 2020 in terms of legislation. The main change concerns the representative suits and director/supervisor dismissal suits brought by protection institutions under the Securities Investors and Futures Traders Protection Act (the “Investor Protection Act”). In contrast, developments in terms of court decisions and administrative interpretations are plenty, which pose impact on the relative power and responsibility between shareholders vis-à-vis directors under Taiwan’s corporate governance laws. In this paper, I firstly comment on the amendments to the Securities Exchange Act and the Investor Protection Act. I then comment on the ruling of the Supreme Court’s Criminal Grand Chamber regarding the criminal offense of non-arms-length transaction under the Securities Exchange Act. Following the above, I use two inconsistent interpretations made by the Ministry of Economic Affairs (“MOEA”) regarding the limits of charter freedom, and the latest Supreme Court decision on voting agreements between shareholders and between directors, to illustrate the conservative attitude of Taiwan’s practice against expanding the shareholder’s power. As a comparison, I use the Supreme Court’s decision regarding the right to information of directors and regarding the business judgment rule as applied to the criminal offense of breach of faith to illustrate the relative trust in directors in Taiwan’s practice. Finally, I use the corporate fight incidents of Tatung Co., particularly the case involving the deletion of directorate candidates nominated by shareholders and the MOEA’s expansive interpretation of the conditions for shareholders to convene shareholders’ meeting, as a case study to illustrate the unresolved issue of the relative power between shareholders and directors under Taiwan’s corporate laws. Overall, the development of corporate laws and securities exchange laws in practice in the year of 2020 provides us many materials to reflect on the relative relationship between shareholders and directors.