兩岸公共工程的轉分包實務與相關規範之比較

Comparison of Trans-contracting and Subcontracting for Public Construction with Legal Practice and Specification on Cross-Strait

本文於兩岸對於公共工程之「轉包」非已「法制度化」下，比較兩岸制度異與實務現況。雖然臺灣營造業赴大陸從事公共工程，政府並未禁止，但受制於兩岸法律及公共工程制度諸多因素之不同，尤其兩岸的工程轉分包制度，將會影響國內營造業赴大陸從事營造工程之意願。故本文將針對業者面臨之轉分包問題迫切性而探討並分析實務案例，期能使臺灣的主管機關、法界及廠商了解兩岸轉分包制度之不同，作為未來西進登陸之準備。蓋營造業層層轉包或不當分包在兩岸地區屢見不鮮，一些營造公司往往標得公共工程簽約後，非在履約過程中負責整體施工，而將該工程交付下游無資質的小包商施作；有的工程甚至轉包多次，致成使得整個工程被肢解得支離破碎。另有總包商將公共工程幾乎全部以分包作業之次承攬商或履行輔助人方式進行，易生層層剝削、偷工減料及職災傷亡。本文將針對兩岸公共工程轉分包的制度適用與實務進行探討，並對轉包、分包與不當分包作出區分。文末也對大陸判決及臺灣調解案例進行剖析，俾除了從法律角度遏阻違法轉包及不當分包外，也論述於制度上適當分包有助於公共工程的專業分工及效率提升，同時建議兩岸的公共工程轉分包制度，亦應在符合各自建築市場需求下，尋求制度上借鏡適用及工程習慣上認知基礎之接軌。

Although the construction industry in Taiwan to the mainland on public construction, the government has not prohibited, but subject to different legal and public construction systems a lot of factors on Cross-Strait. In particular, both sides of the systems of trans-contracting and subcontracting will affect the domestic construction industry to the mainland wishes and create public engineering engaged. Therefore, this paper will investigate the different of legal system on turn-contracting and subcontracting of Public Construction on Cross-Strait. Moreover, two practical cases will be analyzed. It is very useful for authorities, legal profession and construction to understand and landing in the future as a