| 關 鍵 詞： |
舉證責任；舉證責任轉換；因果關係；國家賠償責任；國家賠償責任訴訟 |
| 中文摘要： |
成立公務員故意過失之國家賠償責任要件乃依據國家賠償法第 2 條第 2 項，而進一步參照司法院釋字第 469 號解釋，必須公務員行使公權力有故意或過失、行為違法、特定人之自由或權利受到損害、所受損害與違法行為間具有相當因果關係而非純屬天然災害或其他不可抗力所致。有關公務員違法行為所生國家賠償責任中因果關係之訴訟上風險分配，宜由立法安排而非法院之任務。國家賠償責任中因果關係之舉證責任原則上應由原告負擔，例外在被告重大違反義務時始轉換舉證責任。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
Burden of Proof；Shifting the Burden of Proof；Causation；State Compensation；State Compensation Cases |
| 英文摘要： |
Pursuant to Article 2, Paragraph 2, of the State Compensation Law, the State shall be liable for any damage arising from the intent or negligent act of any employee of the Government acting within the scope of his or her office or employment which infringes upon the freedom or right of any person. The same shall apply where harm is caused to the liberty or rights of the people by reason of failure of a public servant to discharge his or her duties. According to Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 469, as long as the official conduct of a public servant satisfies the following: exercise of public authorities, illegal conduct, sufficient causation between the harm to the liberty or rights of the identifiable persons and the illegal conduct, and the harm is not caused by natural disasters or force majeure events, the victim may base his or her case on either active action or passive inaction request state compensation. The allocation of the burden of proof in the state compensation of civil servants for official wrongs should be arranged by the legislature instead of the aim of the court. In principle, the burden of proving causation in claims for State Compensation should be borne by the plaintiff, except that the burden of proof should be shifted when the defendant seriously violates the obligation.
|
| 目 次： |
壹、前言
貳、本判決內容
一、事實摘要
（一）原告主張事實
（二）被告主張事實
二、爭點
三、歷審判決要旨
參、因果關係之認定
一、相當因果關係
二、多重因果關係
肆、因果關係之舉證責任
一、原則－舉證責任分配
二、例外－舉證責任轉換
（一）特別職業義務重大違反之因果關係舉證責任轉換
（二）學說評論
伍、本件判決評釋
一、舉證責任抽象一般分配之確立
二、具體訴訟中法院之認定
陸、結語
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|