司法院統一解釋法律及命令之考察－－從司法院釋字第740號解釋出發

A Research of the Uniform Interpretation of Statutes and Regulations- The Lessons of J.Y. Interpretation No. 740

以「保險業務員與其所屬保險公司所簽訂之保險招攬勞務契約，是否為勞動基準法第二條第六款所稱勞動契約。」為爭點，司法院釋字第740號解釋提出勞動契約之判斷標準。然而，對於行政法院與民事法院見解之歧異，本號解釋作為統一解釋，是否確實統一法律見解，又或者效果其實未如預期，在後續相關判決出現後，已可作為研究基礎回頭加以檢視。本文首先針對本號解釋文、理由書、各意見書以及評析本號解釋之學說進行剖析，點出解釋本身內含之爭議，接著，再從數個面向分析後續實務見解對於本號解釋之理解與援用。基於前述之分析與整理，最後本文點出本號解釋作為統一解釋，對於統一見解一事之貢獻有限，且引發預期以外之效應，並嘗試將相關問題點之起因具體化，提出統一解釋應注意之點，以作為往後之借鑑。

If the insurance solicitors'contracts of soliciting insurance business with insurance companies are labor contract, has brought tremendous dispute. To solve the issue, J.Y. Interpretation No. 740 established the criteria for labor contract. As an uniform interpretation of statues and regulations, by organizing the opinions of the Court after J.Y. Interpretation No. 740, we could clarify whether or not it resolved the dispute between the court and the administrative court. This thesis first analyzes the holding and the reasoning of the J.Y. Interpretation No. 740, and also the opinions of scholars, to highlight the problem of J.Y. Interpretation No. 740 itself, then analyzes the opinions of the Court after it in several aspects. Based on the analysis, this thesis points out that the Interpretation only produced limited success, and contributed to some unexpected events. At the end, this thesis gives some possible reasons, and provides the possible solutions.