從司法判決實例淺談會計師的民事責任

Abstract

隨著資本市場的發展與科技時代的來臨，股市投資已普遍成為國人理財的方式之一，然而，也會有人想利用不正當的方式，從中獲取不當的利益。因此，會計師的審計工作，也變得越來越重要。 為維護公平公正之交易秩序並保障證券投資人及期貨交易人權益，「證券投資人及期貨交易人保護法」於91年6月20日立法院院會三讀通過，並自92年1月1日施行，並依據投保法之規定，成立了財團法人保護機構「證券投資人及期貨交易人保護中心」（以下簡稱投保中心），除負責提供投資人證券及期貨相關法令之諮詢及申訴服務、買賣有價證券或期貨交易因民事爭議之調處外，亦得為投資人提起團體訴訟或仲裁求償等工作。 投保中心成立之後，只要公開發行公司有因財報不實而遭檢察官起訴時，投保中心均會公告投資人登記求償，彙總資料後，提起團體訴訟，向刑事被告、公司董事、監察人、會計師提起民事求償。 會計師所扮演守門員的角色在經濟社會中的影響愈來愈受到重視，代表外界對會計師也就會有愈高的期待，因此，會計師對於相關的法律責任甚至社會責任更須義不容辭的去遵守、去履行。所以會計師是否盡「專業上應有之注意」，以及舉證責任之分配等，將是判斷會計師應否負起法律責任的重要依據。 投保中心於民國92年成立迄今已16年，針對提起訴訟的部分，法院已有十餘件訴訟案件陸續作出判決結果，對於會計師而言，並未涉犯刑事案件的會計師，是否將會成為團體訴訟下的代罪羔羊？本文試圖以目前已作出之司法判決實例作為基礎，進行整理分析後，提出相關研究心得與建議，以期明確區分及健全我國會計師查核簽證之責任制度。

With the advent of the development of capital market and high-tech era, stock market investment has become one of the common financing methods of the nationals. However, there are some who make attempt on gaining illegal profits in an improper way. Therefore, accountant’s auditing work has become more and more important. To protect the order of fair and equitable trade while guarantee the interests of securities investors and futures traders' equity, Legislative Yuan has passed “Securities Investor and Futures Trader Protection Act”, which is executed starting from January 1st 2003, in the Cabinet meeting on June 20th 2002 and established Securities and Future Investors Protection Center (herein after referred to as SFIPC), a foundation protection organization, in accordance with the regulations stipulated by “Securities Investor and Futures Trader Protection Act”. SFIPC is responsible for providing investors legal consultations relevant to the laws and decrees of securities and futures, complaint services, settling civil disputes caused by the transactions of valuable papers and futures by mediation, filing class action lawsuits for the investors, and arbitrating or claiming compensation. On condition that a public issued company is indicted for financial statement fraud by a public procurator, the SFIPC will bulletin the investors to register for compensation, file class action suits upon summarizing the data, and make civic claim for reimburse from criminal defendant, director of the company, supervisor and accountant after the establishment. The influence brought by the accountant, who plays the role of goalkeeper, draws more and more attention in economic society, which also means that the accountant is likely to receive higher expectations from the outside world. Therefore, it is required that the accountant abides by and fulfills incumbently the relevant legal liabilities and even social responsibilities. Consequently, whether or not the accountant carries out “professional competence and due care” and allocation of burden of proof will become the essential reference for determining whether or not the accountant should bear legal responsibility. Sixteen years have passed since the establishment of SFIPC in 2003. The court has given judgements on more than ten cases aiming at the prosecution of lawsuit in succession. With regard to the accountant, whether or not those who are not involved in a criminal case will become the scapegoats of class action suits? This study tries to organize and analyze the current living examples based on judicial judgement and propose the relevant research review and suggestions in the hope of discriminating explicitly and perfecting the liability system of the auditing and certification of financial statements by certified public accountants of our country.