論雇主之職災補償責任與抵充規定：從三則最高法院判決談起

Employer's Liability for Occupational Accident Compensation and Offset Regulations: Discussing Three Supreme Court Decisions

我國的職業災害救濟制度係採取職災「補償」制度與雇主損害「賠償」責任之併存主義，前者係由勞動基準法（以下簡稱「勞基法」）第59條所定雇主之職業災害補償責任，及勞工職業災害保險及保護法（以下簡稱「災保法」）上之保險給付與津貼補助之雙軌制所構成，而後者則依民法的規定為之。併存主義導致勞工遭遇職災補償時，會有依勞基法、災保法，以及民法3個獨立的救濟管道可以請求，而這三者間卻又存在著互相抵充的關係，實為一錯綜複雜的制度。自2022年災保法施行以來，我國的職業災害補償可謂已經進入了一個新的篇章，但由於雙軌制與併存主義的架構並未發生根本性的變化，且即使災保法大幅提高職災保險之給付水準，仍未完全取代雇主勞基法上的補償責任，雇主雖已全額負擔職災保險費，尚須給付勞基法上之補償責任與職災保險給付間之差額，使得個別雇主之責任仍是職業災害救濟制度之中心，而仍有深入探討雇主之職災補償責任之必要。本文除檢討我國現行法關於雇主職災補償責任之抵充規定外，並以近期3則最高法院判決為素材，針對我國關於雇主職災補償責任之爭議問題進行探討，就災保法施行後實務上仍存在或可能新衍生之問題加以剖析。

Taiwan's occupational accident relief system adopts a dual system of occupational accident compensation and employer's liability for damages, with the former consisting of a dual system of employer's liability for occupational accident compensation as stipulated in Article 59 of the Labor Standards Act and insurance benefits and subsidies under the Labor Occupational Accident Insurance and Protection Act, and the latter based on the provisions of the Civil Code. As a result, when workers suffer occupational accidents, they have three separate and parallel avenues of compensation and relief under the Labor Standards Act, the Labor Occupational Accident Insurance and Protection Act, and the Civil Code. These mechanisms operate independently rather than being mutually exclusive, resulting in a complex and fragmented remedial system. Since the implementation of the Labor Occupational Accident Insurance and Protection Act in 2022, it can be said that occupational accident compensation in Taiwan has entered a new chapter. However, the occupational accident relief system has not undergone fundamental changes, and even though the Labor Occupational Accident Insurance and Protection Act has significantly increased the level of occupational insurance benefits, it still has not completely replaced the employer's liability under the Labor Standards Act. Although the employer has already paid the full amount of the occupational insurance premiums, the employer is still required to pay the difference between the compensation liability under the Labor Standards Act and the occupational insurance benefits. Therefore, the responsibility of individual employers is still the center of the occupational relief system, and there is still a need to explore in-depth the employer's responsibility for occupational accident compensation. In addition to reviewing the offsetting provisions of the current law on employer's occupational accident compensation liability, this article uses three recent Supreme Court decisions as materials to explore the controversial issues of employer's occupational accident compensation liability in Taiwan, and analyzes the problems that still exist in practice after the implementation of the Labor Occupational Accident Insurance and Protection Act or that may be newly derived.