職業安全衛生法上之勞工、工作者與自營作業者──兼評最高法院108年度台上字第3227號刑事判決

The Term“Laborers”,“Workers”and“Self-employed Workers”in Occupational Safety and Health Act: Comment on the No.3227 Penal Judgment (2019) of Taiwan Highest Court

職業安全衛生法對勞工之定義，與勞動基準法幾乎相同，實務見解亦均以從屬性之有無為斷，然而，最高法院108年度台上字第3227號刑事判決為確認有無職業安全法之適用，在勞工之判斷上，特別強調其立法目的。經本文分析後，此從職業安全衛生法之立法目的出發，所提出之判斷基準，與向來判斷是否為勞工以確認有無勞動基準法適用之判決相較，確實有所不同。本文從各個面向進行檢討後，結論上雖肯定本件判決之目的論觀點，因勞動基準法與職業安全衛生法之規範目的與內容本有所不同，保護與適用對象應有所區別，但在職業安全衛生法修正後，相關之區別應注意到勞工、自營作業者與工作者等三個概念間之相互關係，本文並對於三者之相互關係提出看法。

The definition of“labors”in Occupational Safety and Health Act is almost the same as the definition in Labor Standards Act, and both are found by the exist of subordinate relation by the courts. However, to clarify the application of Occupational Safety and Health Act, the No.3227 Penal Judgment (2019) of Taiwan Highest Court makes an emphasis on the purpose of statute. This essay points out that the criterion based on the purpose of statute in this judgement, is different with the criterion in the case regarding Labor Standards Act. After analysis from several aspects, this essay argues that although the difference between Occupational Safety and Health Act and Labor Standards Act makes the criterion based on the purpose of statute of Occupational Safety and Health Act convincing, after the amendment in 2013, the distinction shall the relationship between term“laborers”,“self-employed workers”and“workers”, which is analyzed by this essay.