債務清理法草案和解章節規定之評析——以與德國破產計畫程序之比較為中心

Evaluation of the Settlement Chapter in the Draft of Debt Clearance Act—Focus on its Comparison with the German Insolvency Plan Procedure

本文主要乃就我國2013年與2007年債務清理法草案和解章節中之重要規定從事評析。我國債務清理法草案和解章節仍使用和解程序之概念，然於1999年德國破產法之立法者已放棄使用和解法上和解程序之概念，改採使用破產計畫程序之概念，究以何者為妥，則有更進一步分析之必要性。德國於1999年統一實施破產法時，特別強調企業重建之重要性，基此於破產法第264條設有貸款框架範圍之優先地位規定，以促使企業之重建，然於我國債務清理法草案和解章節規定中並未增訂相當之條文，就此須再作詳細之探討。就和解方案之可決，我國2013年債務清理法草案第69條刪除過去債權人人數過半數同意之要求，此與德國就破產計畫之可決仍要求債權人人數過半數同意之原則並不相同，究以何種模式較為妥適，須作深入之研究。此外，我國2013年債務清理法草案就阻礙禁止之規定與少數債權人之保護，並未作非常明確與完整之規範，就此是否有作更詳盡規範之必要’亦成為本文研究之重點。而我國2007年債務清理法草案以資本額之多寡區分為和解程序與重整程序，其區分之實益與妥當性何在，實有從比較德國破產計畫程序之觀點加以研究之必要。為使上述問題作更進一步之釐清，本文從比較法之觀點，比較我國2013年與2007年債務清理法草案和解程序與德國破產計畫程序之差異性，並基此深入分析我國債務清理法草案和解程序之規定。其目的乃藉由上述不同程序之比較，以提供我國債務清理法草案於未來發展上之參考。

The Essay evaluates the provisions in the settlement chapter of the Draft of Debt Clearance Act. The reformer of the bankruptcy law remains to adopt the concept of the settlement procedure. Instead of such concept, the reformer of the German Insolvency Code in 1999 adopts the concept of the insolvency plan procedure. It is necessary to analyze which one is reasonable. It emphasizes also the importance of the reorganization of the enterprise. Thus, the line of credit is regulated in Provision 264. In contrast, the Draft of Debt Clearance Act lacks of such provision. This needs further study. The Requirement of majority of the persons of creditors in Provision 69 of the draft amendment to Taiwan Bankruptcy Code is omitted. It is different from the German Law, in which it is still also required. In addition, the prohibition of obstruction and the protection of minority are not so explicitly and comprehensively regulated in the draft amendment to the Taiwan Draft of Debt Clearance Act. It is questionable, whether they must be detailedly regulated. According to the amount of the capital, the restructure procedures are divided into the settlement procedure and reorganization procedure based on the concept of the Draft of Debt Clearance Act. It is debatable, if such divide is necessary and appropriate. The essay discusses the difference between the settlement procedure in Taiwan Law and the insolvency procedure in German Law in the light of the comparative law and thereby detailedly evaluates the Draft of Debt Clearance Act. The Aim of this article lies in providing the advice to the future amendment to our Bankruptcy Law through above comparison of different procedures.