第二十章：蔡英文的英派無「理」頭
事實能證明，意見能說服
註腳
【1】 女力講堂蔡英文演講全文：「失敗了再站起來，找回台灣的叛逆與強悍」，點亮台灣 蔡英文、陳建仁，2015年9月2日，http://iing.tw/posts/87（最後瀏覽日：2016年5月17日）。
【2】 Cornell Law School, Facts and Statistics,
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/about/facts_stats.cfm (last visited May 16,
2016).
【3】 Cornell Law School, LLM, http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/admissions/degrees/graduate-legal-studies/LLM.cfm
(last visited May 16, 2016) (“The Master of Laws
(LL.M.) degree program at Cornell Law School is a one-year program designed for
practicing attorneys and recent law school graduates who have earned a first
degree in law outside the United States. Through the LL.M. program, students
increase their understanding of American legal principles and can further
develop a specialization in law.”).
【4】 Cornell Law School, Admissions, http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/admissions/
(last visited May 16, 2016) (“Cornell Law School
is a small, top-tier law school located in stunning surroundings of natural
beauty. We enroll approximately 200 JD students and 85-90 LL.M. students each
year to ensure that we maintain a close knit academic environment. Our students
not only benefit from our small class size but also from one of the lowest
student to faculty ratios in legal education.”).
【5】 Michael Makdisi & John Makdisi, How to write a case brief for
law school: Excerpt Reproduced from Introduction to the Study of Law: Cases and
Materials, Lexis Nexis, http://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/lawschool/pre-law/how-to-brief-a-case.page
(last visited May 16, 2016) (“ While opinions may vary, four elements that are
essential to any useful brief are the following: (a) Facts (name of the case
and its parties, what happened factually and procedurally, and the judgment)
(b) Issues (what is in dispute) (c) Holding (the applied rule of law) (d)
Rationale (reasons for the holding) If you include nothing but these four elements,
you should have everything you need in order to recall effectively the
information from the case during class or several months later when studying
for exams.”); Lloyd Sealy Library, How to Brief a Case, John Jay College of
Criminal Justice, http://www.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/research/brief.html (last
visited May 16, 2016) (“These can be extensive or short, depending on the depth
of analysis required and the demands of the instructor. A comprehensive brief
includes the following elements: 1. Title and Citation, 2. Facts of the Case,
3. Issues, 4. Decisions (Holdings), 5. Reasoning (Rationale), 6. Separate
Opinions, 7. Analysis.”).
【6】 College Board, https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sat/inside-the-test/essay
(last visited May 17, 2016).
【7】 LSAC, http://www.lsac.org/jd/lsat/about-the-lsat (last visited May
17, 2016) (“Reading
comprehension questions measure
the ability to read, with understanding and insight, examples of lengthy and
complex materials similar to those commonly encountered in law school. Analytical
reasoning questions measure the
ability to understand a structure of relationships and to draw logical
conclusions about that structure. Logical reasoning questions assess the ability to analyze, critically
evaluate, and complete arguments as they occur in ordinary language.”)
【8】 New York State Bar Exam Information Guide, New York State Board of
Law Examiners, April 1, 2016, https://www.nybarexam.org/thebar/NYBarExamInformationGuide.pdf
(last visited April 29, 2016).
【9】 Law School Survival, The IRAC Method, http://www.lawschoolsurvival.org/index.php/legal-writing/the-irac-method
(last visited May 17, 2016).
【10】Supra note 8.
【11】Cornell Law Library, Use a Study Aid,
Cornell University Law School, https://law.library.cornell.edu/research/useastudyaid
(last visited May 15, 2016) (“The Registrar's
Office provides Cornell law students with an Online Exam Archive.
These are actual Cornell law school exams from previous years. Exams are
also available on the third floor of the library in alcove 5 by the soft
seating area.”).
【12】林鐘雄，價格的決定－供需雙剪的故事，林鐘雄經濟特別專欄，中央研究院經濟研究所，2014年9月3日， http://www.econ.sinica.edu.tw/cclin/content/newsletter/contents/2013101514144813091/?MSID=2014090314092680484（最後瀏覽日：2016年4月24日）（「你甚至可以使一隻鸚鵡變成一位學術淵博的經濟學家，只要讓牠學會說兩個字眼：『供給』和『需求』。」(“You can make even a parrot into a learned
political economist-all but learn the two words ‘supply’ and ‘demand.’”) ）。
【13】陳博智，市場機制常是不負責任的藉口，台灣智庫，http://www.taiwanthinktank.org/chinese/page/9/26/1062/0（最後瀏覽日：2016年5月15日）。
【14】同上。
【15】同上。
【16】15 U.S.C. § 1 (“Every
contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in
restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations,
is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage
in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed
guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not
exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000,
or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the
discretion of the court.”).
【17】18 U.S.C. § 3571(d) (“If any
person derives pecuniary gain from the offense, or if the offense results in
pecuniary loss to a person other than the defendant, the defendant may be fined
not more than the greater of twice the gross gain or twice the gross loss,
unless imposition of a fine under this subsection would unduly complicate or
prolong the sentencing process.”).
【18】US v. AU Optronics Corp. Indictment No. CR-09-0110, p.6-7 (“On or about
September, 14, 2001, representatives from four Taiwan TFT-LCD
manufactures…secretly met in a hotel room in Taipei, Taiwan and entered into
and engaged in a conspiracy to fix the price if TFT-LCS. At this meeting, the
conspirators agreed to meet approximately once a month for the purpose of
fixing the price These meetings were commonly referred to by some of the
conspirators as “Crystal Meetings” …A representative from defendant AU
OPTRONICS CORPORATION stated at the September 14, 2001 meeting that the
participants at future Crystal Meetings should include the two major Korean
TFT-LCD manufacturers to ensure the success of the conspiracy to fix
the price of TET-LCD… Up until 2003,the participants in the Crystal Meetings
reached price agreements oncertain sized TFT-LCD used in computer notebooks and
monitors.Beginning in 2003, the price agreements reached at the Crystal
Meetings also included certain sized TFT-LCD used in flat-screen
televisions.”).
【19】Roger A. Arnold,
Microeconomics 252 (Cengage
Learning Inc.) (2008); 公平交易法施行細則第3條：「本法第七條所稱獨占，應審酌下列事項認定之：一、事業在相關市場之占有率。二、考量時間、空間等因素下，商品或服務在相關市場變化中之替代可能性。三、事業影響相關市場價格之能力。四、他事業加入相關市場有無不易克服之困難。五、商品或服務之輸入、輸出情形。」。
【20】AU Optronics, supra note 18 (“During the
period covered by this Indictment, participants in the Crystal Meetings
regularly exchanged production, shipping, supply, demand, and pricing information
with each other at the meetings for the purpose of agreeing to fix the price of
TFT-LCD, as well as implementing, monitoring, and enforcing adherence to the
fixed prices…In or about May 2005, the participants in the Crystal Meetings
discussed that one or two major TFT-LCD customers may have detected the Crystal
Meetings. To keep the meetings secret and avoid detection, the Crystal Meeting
participants decided to stop having senior-level Sales executives attend the
Crystal Meetings. Instead, the senior-level executives instructed Lower-level
marketing employees to continue the Crystal Meetings…In or about the spring
2006, the participants in the Crystal Meetings became further concerned about
being detected after receiving news reports of an ongoing price-fixing
investigation by the United States Department of Justice into the dynamic
random access memory (“DRAM”) industry and after receiving other information
about a possible investigation into the TFT-LCD industry. To further avoid
detection and keep the meetings secret, the conspiracy members… agreed to no
longer meet as a group, but Instead have back-to-back, one-on-one meetings with
each other on a certain date each month at restaurants and cafes in Taipei,
Taiwan. ”).
【21】COMP/39.309 LCD (Liquid Crystal Displays (“The
issue of potential cheating and the maintenance of order was an issue seriously
considered and raised by the parties. TFT-LCD is a complex business to manage.
Constant updates are required in order to monitor how the market develops and
what the other suppliers are doing…As a result of these market conditions,
TFT-LCD suppliers undertook significant efforts to ascertain how the market was
developing, what components were available in the market, which volumes, and at
what price. This included regular interaction between competitors. Based on the
above, LCD suppliers tried to reduce uncertainty and instability in the market
as much as possible.”)
【22】Department of Justice, Sherman Act Violations Yielding
a Corporate Fine of $10 Million or More, https://www.justice.gov/atr/sherman-act-violations-yielding-corporate-fine-10-million-or-more
(last visited May 20, 2016).
【23】DOJ, Criminal Program Update 2013: Liquid
Crystal Display Panels, https://www.justice.gov/atr/public-documents/division-update-spring-2013/criminal-program (last visited May 15, 2016).
【24】行政院（八四）公訴決字第○四八號。
【25】同上。
【26】公平交易法第14條：「本法所稱聯合行為，指具競爭關係之同一產銷階段事業，以契約、協議或其他方式之合意，共同決定商品或服務之價格、數量、技術、產品、設備、交易對象、交易地區或其他相互約束事業活動之行為，而足以影響生產、商品交易或服務供需之市場功能者。」。
【27】何之邁，獨占(上)，月旦法學教室，第60期，2007年，74頁。
【28】同上；莊春發，論「足以影響市場功能」的聯合行為，月旦法學雜誌，第69期，2001年，53頁。
【29】何之邁，註27。
【30】HDC Medical, Inc. v. Minntech Corp. 474 F.3d 543,
547 (8th Cir. 2007) (“The boundaries of
the product market can be determined by the reasonable interchangeability or
cross-elasticity of demand between the product itself and possible substitutes
for it.”).
【31】莊春發，註28，頁43。
【32】廖義男，公平交易法之立法目的與保護之法益－第一條之詮釋，公平交易季刊，創刊號，1992年，頁5。
【33】曾品傑，從民法到公平交易法－以損害賠償為中心，公平交易季刊第6卷第1期，1998年，92頁。
【35】1991年版公平交易法第35條：獨占、聯合、仿冒行為之處罰)違反第十條、第十四條、第二十條或第二十三條第一項之規定者，處行為人三年以下有期徒刑、拘役或科或併科新臺幣一百萬元以下罰金。
【36】1999年版公平交易法第35條：「（獨占、聯合、仿冒行為之處罰）違反第十條、第十四條、第二十條第一項規定，經中央主管機關依第四十一條規定限期命其停止、改正其行為或採取必要更正措施，而逾期未停止、改正其行為或未採取必要更正措施，或停止後再為相同或類似違反行為者，處行為人三年以下有期徒刑、拘役或科或併科新臺幣一億元以下罰金。違反第二十三條規定者，處行為人三年以下有期徒刑、拘役或科或併科新臺幣一億元以下罰金。」。
【37】公平會，註34。
【38】Addyston Pipe & Steel Co. v. United States,
175 U.S. 211, 237 (1899). Judge Posner notes that 90% of the prison sentences
for violation of antitrust law arise in bid-rigging cases, citing Richard A. Posner, Antitrust Law, 44
n.29 (2d ed. University of Chicago Press) (2001).
【39】OECD, Guidelines for Fighting Bid Rigging in Public
Procurement: Helping Governments to Obtain Best Value for Money (“Bid
rigging is an illegal practice in all OECD member countries and can be
investigated and sanctioned under the competition law and rules. In a number of
OECD countries, bid rigging is also a criminal offence.”). http://www.oecd.org/competition/cartels/42851044.pdf
(last visited April 24, 2016).
【40】黃豐鑑，高雄捷運公辦六標弊案檢調應追究到底，國政評論，財團法人國家政策研究基金會，2006年10月17日，http://old.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/SD/095/SD-C-095-056.htm（最後瀏覽日：2016年4月24日）。
【41】鮑建信，高捷公辦六標案 鍾善藤等改判無罪，自由時報，2009年6月6日，http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/paper/309074（最後瀏覽日：2016年4月24日）。
【42】同上。
【43】林巧雁、林韋伶，出口連十五黑 比金融海嘯慘，蘋果日報，2016年5月10日，http://www.appledaily.com.tw/appledaily/article/headline/20160510/37205600/（最後瀏覽日：2016年4月24日）。
【44】劉屏，歐巴馬報告 批台灣投資環境差，中時電子報，2014年3月5日，http://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20140305004693-260401（最後瀏覽日：2016年5月15日）。
【45】黃天如、邱琮皓、蒼弘慈，台灣投資環境五缺 工總痛批：還有缺德，中時電子報，2015年10月22日，http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20151022000393-260102（最後瀏覽日：2016年4月24日）。
【46】台糖通訊，台糖投資事業專題系列：中美嘉吉(股)公司陪著台灣經濟起飛，http://www.taisugar.com.tw/Monthly/CPN.aspx?ms=1401&s=13385479&p=13385639（最後瀏覽日：2016年5月17日）。
沒有留言:
張貼留言