對企業違法行為之私人舉發制度──以吹哨者保護法為中心

Private enforcement against corporate frauds–focusing on the whistleblower protection.

系所名稱：法律學研究所
學位別：碩士
畢業學年：103年
指導教授：邵慶平
隨著工商發展越來越繁榮，企業對經濟及公眾影響越來越大，而當企業出現舞弊之狀況時，往往造成極大的損害，因此在法規上必須加以防範企業舞弊，而在防止企業舞弊之手段上，除了公權力執行外尚有私人執行之方式，其中私人執行分成兩大部分，一為私人舉發，二為私人訴權，後者乃係在舞弊發生後，私人角色有權利得向違法者主張求償，係屬於事後之權利，藉由事後救濟權利加以遏止企業違法。而前者較屬於前端之權利，當發現企業有舞弊時，得以將其情事加以舉發，使大眾或主管機關知悉有此狀況。相較於後者，前者在防止或阻止企業舞弊之手段上較為直接。而在私人舉發權之架構下主要討論的制度，便是吹哨者保護法，而吹哨者保護法在外國適用相當廣泛，如在公家機關內之運作，以防止公務員貪汙，又有在企業內運用，然我國目前對此制度之立法較為欠缺，故加以討論在我國建構此制度。並進一步討論該制度在防範企業舞弊時應該如何設計該法制，以美國沙賓法案與Dodd-Frank 法為主要討論對象，並結合學者之檢討，加以分析我國該法制該如何設計。以及該法規所保護之對象範圍為何加以討論，分成企業員工、企業管理者以及企業監督者三種角色加以討論，其中企業監督者以外部進入企業進行監督之人為主，及典型的守門員角色，會計師、律師、承銷商以及信用評等機構。最後縱無法全面適用該法，但應該就此些較容易知悉企業違反情況之人員設計舉發制度，已達防止企業舞弊之目的。

With more and more prosperous developments in the fields of industry and commerce, corporations have more impact in our economy and the public. Especially when the financial fraud was taken place in corporations, it always resulted in a tremendous damage. Therefore, we must emphasize on regulations to against and deter the corporate fraud. The methods of enforcing regulations to deter the corporate fraud are not only public but also private enforcements. In the aspect of private enforcements, they are divided into two parts, which are private right of initiation and private rights of action, respectively. The latter are the rights that private litigants can suit the person allegedly violating regulations and advocate claims when fraud occurs. However, compared with the former, private rights of action are afterwards. In contrary, private rights of initiation are the rights that people who discover the corporate fraud can immediately disclose it to the authority or the general public. It is the more direct method to prevent the corporate fraud. The major discussion under the rights of initiation is the Whistleblower Protection Act. In overseas, Whistleblower Protection Act is widely applied in many aspects such as in public authorities to prevent civil servants from corruption or in the financial market to deter the corporate fraud. However, we still lack of this kind of whistleblower protection mechanism in our legislation. Thus in this article we will focus on discussing how to construct the analogous whistleblower protection mechanism.Furthermore, we will also discuss how to design our own mechanism in financial market to prevent the corporate fraud by the means of legislation. It should be designed to make the potential whistleblower willing to stand out to blow the whistle. Therefore, our discussion will be divided into three parts including procedures, protections and rewards based on the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Act and the discussion from scholars. Our final discussion is who should be applied to the whistleblower protection mechanism in our regulation. We classify three different roles containing employees, managers and supervisors in the corporation. In supervisors, we focus on external people who are delegated to supervise the companies according to the contract between them, such as auditors, attorneys, underwriters or credit rating agencies typically named gatekeepers. Last but not least, even though this regulation is not possible to applied comprehensively, we still have to design the proper mechanism of initiation for these three roles in order to prevent the fraud and protect the public interest.