行政協議中行政性與合同性的關係──從司法審查中爭議類型角度的觀察

解讀行政訴訟法上的“協議”概念及其內部行政性與合同性的關係，應當以行政訴訟程序法本身為基點，堅守合法性審查的本質屬性。這個角度的探究首先可以從類型化出發，將協議與行政行為的關係分為兩大類:作為行政行為對象的協議與作為行政行為本身的協議;後者再繼續分為涉及意思表示的合法性爭議和確定性爭議，由此將討論集中於該類型爭議範圍內。在此基礎上，通過分析採用單純行政角度審查的判例“超宇公司案”，可整理出行政裁量中行政權職權範圍與合同意思表示自由之間關係的法解釋框架，繼而用此框架分析舊法中採用“行政合同”案由的判例(起點)和新法最近期判例(現狀)中司法判斷的結構狀態，以驗證該框架的適用性。通過歸納判例經驗並結合法定有名協議中行政部分的特性與司法審查的關系，可建立起行政統合性法律解釋框架，將協議中行政主體方的意思表示(合同性)部分轉換為行政裁量中效果選擇行為，從而將其納入行政訴訟法的約束框架。

To interpret the concept of“agreement”in administrative litigation law and its relationship between administrative and contractual aspects, it's essential to base the analysis on the nature of legality review within administrative litigation procedures. This exploration starts by categorizing agreements into two main types and three subtypes: agreements as objects of administrative actions and agreements as administrative actions themselves. The latter can be further divided into legitimacy disputes involving intent and certainty disputes, narrowing the focus to this type of controversy. Building on this, by analyzing cases like the“Chao Yu Company Case”, which uses a purely administrative review perspective, a legal interpretative framework can be developed to outline the relationship between the scope of administrative discretion and contractual freedom. This framework is then applied to analyze case law under old laws involving“administrative contracts”and recent cases under new laws, validating the framework's applicability. By synthesizing case law practices and considering the characteristics of the administrative aspects within statutory agreements, a cohesive legal interpretative framework is established. This framework translates the administrative agency's intent (contractual) aspects within agreements into administrative discretionary actions subject to administrative litigation law's constraints.