| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 法律學研究所 === 102 === ABSTRACT
Is a juridical person (legal person), such as a corporate, liable in criminal law?
In the category of civil law or administrative law, a juridical person has always been considered liable for whatever it “conducts”. On one hand, the juridical person might be liable because of the behavior of single natural person. For example, in the scope of Torts, if the employee has wrongfully caused any injury to the rights of another in the performance of his duties, the employer, a juridical person, shall be jointly liable to make compensation; it also is liable for any contracts that is signed by its chairman of other representatives. On the other hand, the juridical person might also be liable for the behavior conducted by its whole organization. For example, a construction company shall be liable for the collapse of building caused by its defective house designation or construction. Therefore, few people would doubt the civil or administrative liability of juridical persons.
However, when it comes to criminal liability, no matter foreign scholars or scholars in Taiwan, many indicate that juridical person shall have no criminal liability at all, despite the fact that plenty articles in Taiwan and other countries have been set up to criminally punish juridical persons.
This essay indicates that, whether a juridical person is criminally liable or not, the conclusion shall be based on the review of the juridical basis of juridical persons’ liability, not an intuitive reaction. This essay begins with the review of the nature of juridical person. Then, through the reference of the legislation of other countries, such as America, England, Australia, German, Italy, China and Japan, this essay finds out that current legislation in Taiwan is inadequate and might violates the Constitution. In the short term, the legislation shall repeal the laws that punish only the representatives of a juridical person, and the jurisdiction shall refers to the theory basis used by Japan jurisdiction, which presumes the negligence of juridical person’s supervision. In this way, the criminal liability of juridical person might be comparatively reasonable.
Furthermore, still this essay do not consider the aforementioned short term solution the best way of juridical person’s criminal liability. Taking reference of Italy, America, Australia legislation and the criminal theory of Japan scholars, this essay indicates that considering the juridical person being liable for the behavior conducted by its whole “organization” is the only solution for the theoretical basis of corporate criminal liability. Thus, the practice of “compliance system” shall be the standard to judge whether the juridical person’s conduct is committed intentionally or negligently. In the long term, the legislation in Taiwan shall amend the laws to comply with aforementioned theory basis, or else the laws might all be invalid for not being theoretically reasonable and violate the Constitution.
|
|---|
