本研究以多元迴歸及變異數分析檢視警察機關國家賠償案件中法院酌定慰撫金的影響因素，歸納五項主要發現：第一，慰撫金數額與「勞動力減損賠償」及「扶養費」呈顯著負相關，顯示法院可能因其他賠償項目金額較高而調降慰撫金，形成反比現象。第二，慰撫金數額存在定錨效應，法院可能受關係人請求金額影響而提高判賠，顯示制度上有必要設置賠償上限及例外規定，以增進其可預測性。第三，慰撫金調節功能可能因當事人與有過失而啟動，亦即法院可能考量當事人因負擔與有過失責任，進而提高慰撫金數額以填補損失。第四，不同侵權種類對慰撫金有顯著影響，生命法益受侵害時金額最高，身體法益次之，自由與財產法益差異不大，顯示法院依法益重要性與損害程度實施差異化判決。第五，警察機關應採「雙軸風險管理（或謂雙極風險管理）」策略，將案件類型依敗訴率（風險軸）與慰撫金金額（數額軸）分為四個象限，並對照「高風險、高數額」採取「事前協議優先、主動與當事人溝通，避免長期訴訟及高額賠償」；「低風險、高數額」採取「可評估，並依據證據力與社會觀感選擇訴訟或事前協議」；及「高風險、低數額」採取「可應訴」等三項策略作為案件應處之參考，以兼顧風險控管與資源運用效率。

This study employs multiple regression and analysis of variance to examine the factors influencing court-awarded solatium in state liability cases involving police agencies. Five key findings are summarized as follows:<br>First, solatium is significantly and negatively correlated with“loss of earning capacity”and“support payments,”indicating that courts may reduce solatium amounts when other compensation items are higher, creating an inverse relationship. Second, there is evidence of an anchoring effect: courts may be influenced by the amount claimed by the parties, leading to higher awards. This suggests a need for institutional measures to set compensation caps and exceptions to enhance predictability. Third, the proportion of contributory negligence not only affects the reduction of total compensation but may also trigger the moderating function of solatium; in such cases, courts may increase solatium to offset losses while reducing the total award. Fourth, different categories of infringed legal interests have a statistically significant impact on solatium. Cases involving the infringement of the right to life result in the highest amounts, followed by bodily integrity, while differences between freedom and property rights are minimal, showing that courts apply differentiated awards based on the importance of the interest and the severity of harm. Fifth, the study recommends a dual-axis risk management strategy for police agencies, classifying cases by likelihood of losing and expected award amount. High-risk, high-amount cases should prioritize pre-litigation settlement, while other categories may be approached with flexible litigation or negotiation strategies to balance risk control and resource efficiency.