美國整編侵權法 (第二版) (1)－關於愛，我是個小學生。

美國法律整編 (第二版) 侵權行為法
Restatement of The Law, Second, Torts
中文資料來源：司法週刊雜誌社，美國法律整編侵權法，1988年版
輔仁大學黃裕凱老師編

Division 1. Intentional Harms To Persons, Land, And Chattels
Chapter 1 Meaning Of Terms Used Throughout The Restatement Of Torts
§ 1. Interest
The word “interest” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the object of any human desire.

第壹編故意對他人之身體、土地及動產之傷害
第一章侵權行為法整編中所使用之名詞之意義
第1條利益
「利益」於本整編中，係指任何人所期望之目標。

§ 2. Act
The word “act” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote an external manifestation of the actor's will and does not include any of its results, even the most direct, immediate, and intended.

第2條行為
「行為」於本整編，係指行為人意願之對外表示行為，但不包括其表示之任何結果；縱然結果為直接、當前、故意致其發生者亦然。

§ 3. Actor
The word “actor” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to designate either the person whose conduct is in question as subjecting him to liability toward another, or as precluding him from recovering against another whose tortious conduct is a legal cause of the actor's injury.

第3條行為人
「行為人」於本整編，係指其行為為爭端之所在而致其應對他人負責之人，或其行為為爭端之所在而他人之侵權行為為致其受到傷害，但卻不得請求賠償之人。

§ 4. Duty
The word “duty” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the fact that the actor is required to conduct himself in a particular manner at the risk that if he does not do so he becomes subject to liability to another to whom the duty is owed for any injury sustained by such other, of which that actor's conduct is a legal cause.

第4條責任
「責任」於本整編，係指行為人應依特定之方式而作行為，否則對於其對之原負有義務之人因而受到傷害時，應對之負責之事實。

§ 5. Subject To Liability
The words “subject to liability” are used throughout the Restatement
of this Subject to denote the fact that the actor's conduct is such as to
make him liable for another's injury, if
(a) the actor's conduct is a legal cause thereof, and
(b) the actor has no defense applicable to the particular claim.

第5條負責任
「負責任」於本整編，係指行為人之行為如於下列情形，以致應就他人之傷害負責之事實：
(a)行為人之行為係請求之法律原因；而且
(b)行為人就特定之請求，無抗辯原因。

§ 6. Tortuous Conduct

The word “tortuous” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the fact that conduct whether of act or omission is of such a character as to subject the actor to liability under the principles of the law of Torts.

第6條侵權行為
「侵權行為」於本整編，係指行為之作為或不作為，具有致行為人依侵權行為法應負責任者而言。

§ 7. Injury And Harm
(1)The word “injury” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the invasion of any legally protected interest of another.
(2)The word “harm” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the existence of loss or detriment in fact of any kind to a person resulting from any cause.
(3)The words “physical harm” are used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the physical impairment of the human body, or of land or chattels.

第7條侵害與傷害
(1)「侵害」於本整編，係指就他人之受法律保護之利益之侵犯。
(2)「傷害」於本整編，係指致人實際受到損失或不利之存在事實。
(3)「實體傷害」於本整編，係指對人體、土地及動產之實體上傷害。

§ 8. Unavoidable Accident
The words “unavoidable accident” are used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the fact that the harm which is so described is not caused by any tortious act of the one whose conduct is in question.

第8條不可避免之原因
「不可避免之原因」於本整編，係指傷害之發生並非因系爭行為人之侵權行為所致之法律事實。

§ 8A. Intent
The word “intent” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote that the actor desires to cause consequences of his act, or that he believes that the consequences are substantially certain to result from it.

第8A條故意
「故意」於本整編，係指行為人期望其行為導致某種結果，或行為人相信其期望之結果相當確定將發生。

§ 9. Legal Cause
The words “legal cause” are used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the fact that the causal sequence by which the actor's tortuous conduct has resulted in an invasion of some legally protected interest of another is such that the law holds the actor responsible for such harm unless there is some defense to liability.

第9條法律原因
「法律原因」於本整編，係指行為人之侵權行為致他人受法律保護之利益遭受侵害，並致行為人依法律規定，除非就其應負責任有抗辯權，行為人就此種侵害所致之傷害應負責任之法律事實。

§ 10. Privilege
(1)The word “privilege” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the fact that conduct which, under ordinary circumstances, would subject the actor to liability, under particular circumstances does not subject him to such liability.
(2)A privilege may be based upon
(a) the consent of the other affected by the actor's conduct, or
(b) the fact that its exercise is necessary for the protection of some interest of the actor or of the public which is of such importance as to justify the harm caused or threatened by its exercise, or
(c) the fact that the actor is performing a function for the proper performance of which freedom of action is essential.

第10條特殊權利
(1)「特殊權利」於本整編，係指一行為在一般情況下將致行為人須負責任。
(2)特殊權利得基於下列理由：
(a) 受行為人之行為影響之人之同意；或
(b) 為保護行為人或大眾之利益有作某行為之必要，而致他人受到傷害或傷害之威脅者，有合理化之理由(有正當理由)；或
(c) 行為人之行為係本於行為自由之原則所應有之功能而施行者。

§ 10A. Consent
The word “consent” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote willingness in fact that an act or an invasion of an interest shall take place.

第10A條同意
「同意」於本整編，係指對於一行為或利益之侵害，願意讓其發生。

§ 11. Reasonably Believes
The words “reasonably believes” are used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the fact that the actor believes that a given fact or combination of facts exists, and that the circumstances which he knows, or should know, are such as to cause a reasonable man so to believe.

第11條合理地相信
「合理地相信」於本整編，係指行為人相信特定一事實或數事實之存在，而行為人明知或可得而知之情況就一般合理人亦將致同樣之相信。

§ 12. Reason To Know; Should Know
(1)The words “reason to know” are used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the fact that the actor has information from which a person of reasonable intelligence or of the superior intelligence of the actor would infer that the fact in question exists, or that such person would govern his conduct upon the assumption that such fact exists.
(2)The words “should know” are used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote the fact that a person of reasonable prudence and intelligence or of the superior intelligence of the actor would ascertain the fact in question in the performance of his duty to another, or would govern his conduct upon the assumption that such fact exists.

第12條有理由得知；應知
(1)「有理由得知」於本整編，係指行為人所具有之消息，依一般合理人之智慧，或行為人之更高智慧應推論系爭之事實存在，或該行為人應本於該事實之存在而規範其行為。
(2)「應知」於本整編，係指依一般合理人之謹慎、智慧或行為人之更高之謹慎、智慧，於履行其對於他人之義務時，應確認系爭之事實，於本於該事實存在之推定而規範其行為。

§ 12A. Damages
The word “damages” is used throughout the Restatement of this Subject to denote a sum of money awarded to a person injured by the tort of another.

第12A條賠償
「賠償」於本整編，係指因他人之侵權行為致受侵害者所得補償之金錢數額。

Chapter 2. Intentional Invasions Of Interests In Personality
Topic 1. The Interest In Freedom From Harmful Bodily
Contact
§ 13. Battery: Harmful Contact
An actor is subject to liability to another for battery if
(a) he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and
(b) a harmful contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results.

第二章對於人之利益之故意侵犯
第一節免於受傷害性身體觸擊自由之利益
第13條毆擊傷害性之觸擊
行為人於下列情形，應對他人負毆擊之責任：
(a) 行為人故意(意圖)使發生該他人或第三人之身體受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊，或使發生該他人或第三人就身體受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊有即將來臨之憂慮；且
(b) 致他人之身體受傷害性之觸擊，直接或間接地發生。

§ 14. Necessity Of Act By Defendant
To make the actor liable for a battery, the harmful bodily contact must be caused by an act done by the person whose liability is in question.

第14條被告之行為之必要性
應負毆擊之責任者，致他人受傷害性之身體觸擊須係其行為而造成。

§ 15. What Constitutes Bodily Harm
Bodily harm is any physical impairment of the condition of another's body, or physical pain or illness.

第15條構成身體傷害之要件
身體傷害係指他人身體情況之任何肉體傷害、肉體痛苦或疾病。

§ 16. Character Of Intent Necessary
(1)If an act is done with the intention of inflicting upon another an offensive but not a harmful bodily contact, or of putting another in apprehension of either a harmful or offensive bodily contact, and such act causes a bodily contact to the other, the actor is liable to the other for a battery although the act was not done with the intention of bringing about the resulting bodily harm.
(2)If an act is done with the intention of affecting a third person in the manner stated in Subsection (1), but causes a harmful bodily contact to another, the actor is liable to such other as fully as though he intended so to affect him.

第16條所具備之故意之特性
(1)行為之作成係基於使他人受冒犯性，但並非傷害性之觸擊之故意，或係基於使他人受冒犯性或傷害性之觸擊之憂慮之故意，而致他人受傷害性之觸擊時，雖行為人並非基於使他人受傷害性觸擊之故意，行為應對該他人負毆擊之責任。
(2)行為人基於使第三人受前項規定之故意，卻使他人受傷害性之身體觸擊時，行為人對於該他人應有如故意使其受傷害性之身體觸擊而負責。

§ 17. Bodily Harm Caused Otherwise Than By Harmful Contact
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 46.]

第17條因觸擊性以外之原因而致身體遭受傷害
【本條刪除，有關事項規定於第46 條】

Topic 2. The Interest In Freedom From Offensive Bodily Contact
第二節免於受冒犯性身體觸擊自由之利益

§ 18. Battery: Offensive Contact

(1)An actor is subject to liability to another for battery if

(a) he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and

(b) an offensive contact with the person of the other directly or indirectly results.

(2) An act which is not done with the intention stated in Subsection

(1, a) does not make the actor liable to the other for a mere offensive contact with the other's person although the act involves an unreasonable risk of inflicting it and, therefore, would be negligent or reckless if the risk threatened bodily harm.

第18條毆擊－冒犯性之觸擊

(1)行為人於下列情形時，應對他人負毆擊之責任：

(a) 行為人故意(意圖)使發生該他人或第三人之身體受傷害性，或使發生該他人或第三人就身體受傷害性或

冒犯性之觸擊有即將來臨之憂慮；並且

(b) 致他人之身體受冒犯性之觸擊，直接或間接地發生。

(2)行為基於前項a.款所述之故意，縱然該行為牽涉致冒犯性之身體觸擊之不合理危險(如該危險致身體之受傷害之虞者，得成立過失或重大過失之行為)，但行為人就其發生冒犯性之身體觸擊，不負責任。

§ 19. What Constitutes Offensive Contact

A bodily contact is offensive if it offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity.

第19條冒犯性觸擊之構成要件

就身體之觸擊而對人之合理尊嚴冒犯者，為冒犯性觸擊。

§ 20. Character Of Intent Necessary

(1)If an act is done with the intention of inflicting upon another a harmful bodily contact or of putting the other in apprehension of either a harmful or offensive bodily contact, and if it causes an offensive bodily contact to the other, the actor is subject to liability to the other although the act was not done with the intention of bringing about the resulting offensive contact.

(2)If an act is done with the intention of affecting a third person in the manner stated in Subsection (1) but causes an offensive bodily contact to another, the actor is subject to liability to such other as fully as though he intended so to affect him.

第20條所須具備之故意之特性

(1)行為之作成係基於使他人受傷害性之觸擊之故意，或基於使他人受冒犯性或傷害性之觸擊之憂慮之故意，而致他人受冒犯性之身體觸擊時，雖行為人並非基於使他人受冒犯性之身體觸擊之故意，

行為人應對該他人負毆擊責任。

(2)行為人基於使第三人受前項規定之故意，卻使他人受冒犯性之身體觸擊時，行為人對於該他人應有如故意使其受冒犯性之身體觸擊而負責。

Topic 3. The Interest In Freedom From Apprehension Of A Harmful Or Offensive Contact

§ 21. Assault

(1)An actor is subject to liability to another for assault if

(a) he acts intending to cause a harmful or offensive contact with the person of the other or a third person, or an imminent apprehension of such a contact, and

(b) the other is thereby put in such imminent apprehension.

(2)An action which is not done with the intention stated in Subsection

(1, a) does not make the actor liable to the other for an apprehension caused thereby although the act involves an unreasonable risk of causing it and, therefore, would be negligent or reckless if the risk threatened bodily harm.

第三節免於憂慮受傷害性或冒犯性觸擊之自由之利益

第21條恫嚇

(1)行為人於下列情形時，應對他人負恫嚇之責任：

(a) 行為人故意(意圖)使發生該他人或第三人之身體受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊，或使發生該他人或第三人就

身體受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊有即將來臨之憂慮；並且

(b) 該他人因之而受到即將受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊之憂慮。

(2)行為並非基於前項a.款所述之故意，縱然該行為牽涉致傷害性或冒犯性之身體觸擊之憂慮之不合理危險(如該危險致身體之受傷害之虞者，得成立過失或重大過失之行為)，但行為人就其發生傷害性或冒犯性之身體觸擊之憂慮，不負責任。

§ 22. Attempt Unknown To Other

An attempt to inflict a harmful or offensive contact or to cause an apprehension of such contact does not make the actor liable for an assault if the other does not become aware of the attempt before it is terminated.

第22條未為他人所知之意圖

意圖使他人受傷害性或侮辱性之觸擊，或使他人受此種觸擊之憂慮，於該他人未知悉其意圖前終止者，行為人不負「恫嚇」之責。

§ 23. Termination Of Attempt After Other's Knowledge

If the actor has so acted as to put another in apprehension of an immediate and harmful or offensive contact, he is subject to liability for an assault although he thereafter terminates his attempt or it is frustrated.

第23條於他人知悉後，意圖之中止行為人之行為已使他人憂慮將受當前之傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊時，縱然其後行為人中

止意圖或其意圖受挫折，仍應負恫嚇之責。

§ 24. What Constitutes Apprehension

In order that the other may be put in the apprehension necessary to make the actor liable for an assault, the other must believe that the act may result in imminent contact unless prevented from so resulting by the other's self-defensive action or by his flight or by the intervention of some outside force.

第24條構成憂慮之要件

行為人應負使他人憂慮之「恫嚇」之責者，係指該他人相信行為人之行為除非經正當防衛、緊急避難或其他外在力量之介入，傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊立即發生。

§ 25. Source Of Danger

To make the actor liable for an assault the actor need not have put the other in apprehension that the actor will himself inflict a bodily contact upon him.

第25條危險從何處發生

行為人應負恫嚇之責者，並不以致他人憂慮而由行為人自己使其受身體觸擊者為限。

§ 26. Person Threatened By Actor's Conduct

To make the actor liable for an assault the other must be put in apprehension of a contact with his own person.

第26條受到行為人之行為威脅之人行為人應負恫嚇之責者，必須使他人憂慮其身體將受觸擊。

§ 27. Unreasonable Character Of Apprehension

If an act is intended to put another in apprehension of an immediate bodily contact and succeeds in so doing, the actor is subject to liability for an assault although his act would not have put a person of ordinary courage in such apprehension.

第27條憂慮具備不合理之特性時意圖使他人憂慮將受立即之身體觸擊而行為，該他人因之而憂慮時，縱然其行為就具有一般勇氣之人原不致憂慮，仍應負恫嚇之責。

§ 28. Apprehension Of Unintended Bodily Contact

If the actor intends merely to put the other in apprehension of a bodily contact, he is subject to liability for an assault to the other if the other, although realizing that the actor does not intend to inflict such a contact upon him, is put in apprehension of the contact.

第28條非行為人之故意使其身體受觸擊而產生之憂慮該他人雖確知行為人無意使其身體遭受觸擊，但憂慮其身體可能遭受觸擊時，行為人應負恫嚇之責。

§ 29. Apprehension Of Imminent And Future Contact

(1)To make the actor liable for an assault he must put the other in apprehension of an imminent contact.

(2)An act intended by the actor as a step toward the infliction of a future contact, which is so recognized by the other, does not make the actor liable for an assault under the rule stated in § 21.

第29條即將觸擊之憂慮與未來觸擊之憂慮

(1)對他人產生即將受觸擊之憂慮，行為人應負恫嚇之責。

(2)行為人之行為僅是促使他人遭受未來身體觸擊之一措施，該他人亦瞭解其情況者，行為人毋須依本法第21條規定，負恫嚇之責。

§ 30. Conditional Threat

If the actor intentionally puts another in apprehension of an imminent and harmful or offensive contact, he is subject to liability for an assault although he gives to the other the option to escape the contact by obedience to a command given by the actor, unless the command is one which the actor is privileged to enforce by the infliction of the threatened contact or by a threat to inflict it.

第30條附條件之威脅

行為人意圖使他人憂慮將受當前、立即之傷害性或冒犯性觸擊而給予該他人服從其命令以避免此種憂慮之選擇時，除行為人有執行此觸擊或執行此種觸擊之威脅之特權外，應負恫嚇之責。

§ 31. Threat By Words

Words do not make the actor liable for assault unless together with other acts or circumstances they put the other in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact with his person.

第31條語言上之威脅

僅為語言上之威脅，行為人毋須負恫嚇之責。但語言上之威脅與其他之行為或客觀情況使他人產生將受當前、立即之傷害性或冒犯性之身體觸擊時，須負恫嚇之責。

§ 32. Character Of Intent Necessary
(1)To make the actor liable for an assault, the actor must have intended to inflict a harmful or offensive contact upon the other or to have put the other in apprehension of such contact.
(2)If an act is done with the intention of affecting a third person in the manner stated in Subsection (1), but puts another in apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact, the actor is subject to liability to such other as fully as though he intended so to affect him.

第32條所須具備之故意之特性

(1)行為人應負恫嚇之責者，必須有使他人受傷害性或冒犯性之身體觸擊之故意，或使他人產生此種觸擊之憂慮。

(2)行為人基於使第三人依前項規定之方式受傷害性或冒犯性之身體觸擊之故意，或使產生此種觸擊之憂慮，卻致他人產生將受傷害性或冒犯性攻擊之憂慮時，行為人應對該他人有如故意使其受憂慮而負恫嚇之責。

§ 33. Ability To Carry Out Threat

To make the actor liable for an assault, it is not necessary that he have or that he believe that he has the ability to inflict the harmful or bodily contact which his act apparently threatens.

第33條實施其威脅之能力

行為人應負恫嚇之責者，僅其行為外表顯示威脅傷害性或身體觸擊為已足，並非以其具有或相信其具有傷害性或身體觸擊之能力為必要。

§ 34. Personal Hostility

To make the actor liable for an assault under the rule stated in § 21, it is not necessary that the actor be inspired by personal hostility or desire to offend.

第34條行為之個人仇視

行為人須依第21條規定負恫嚇之責者，並不以行為人之個人仇視或侵犯之欲望之鼓舞為必要。

Topic 4. The Interest In Freedom From Confinement

§ 35. False Imprisonment

(1)An actor is subject to liability to another for false imprisonment if

(a) he acts intending to confine the other or a third person within boundaries fixed by the actor, and

(b) his act directly or indirectly results in such a confinement of the other, and

(2)An act which is not done with the intention stated in Subsection

(1, a) does not make the actor liable to the other for a merely transitory or otherwise harmless confinement, although the act involves an unreasonable risk of imposing it and therefore would be negligent or reckless if the risk threatened bodily harm.

第四節免於受人身拘禁自由之利益

第35條人身拘禁

(1)行為人於下列情形時，應對他人負拘禁之責：

(a) 行為人基於意圖使他人或第三人侷限於其所定之範圍之內之行為；並且

(b) 其行為直接或間接致他人受此種拘禁；並且

(2)行為人並非基於前項規定之故意，而其行為僅致他人受短暫或無傷害之拘禁，不須對該他人負人身拘禁之責。但其行為具有不合理之危險，而該危險威脅體之傷害時，可能成立過失或重大過失。

§ 36. What Constitutes Confinement

(1)To make the actor liable for false imprisonment, the other's confinement within the boundaries fixed by the actor must be complete.

(2)The confinement is complete although there is a reasonable means of escape, unless the other knows of it.

(3)The actor does not become liable for false imprisonment by intentionally preventing another from going in a particular direction in which he has a right or privilege to go.

第36條構成人身拘禁之要件

(1)為使行為人負人身拘禁之責，行為人之使他方侷限於特定範圍者，其侷限之限制必須徹底、完整。

(2)拘禁之範圍內縱有逃離之途徑，受拘禁人未知悉時，其拘禁仍為徹底、完整。

(3)他人就前往之特定方向有權利或特殊權利時，行為人如僅阻礙該他人前往該方向(該他人得往其他方向)者，仍不成立人身拘禁。

§ 37. Confinement: How Caused

If an act is done with the intent to confine another, and such act is the legal cause of confinement to another, it is immaterial whether the act directly or indirectly causes the confinement.

第37條拘禁 - 如何造成

行為係基於拘禁他人之故意而作成時，該行為不論直接或間接致他人受拘禁，均為拘禁他人之法律原因。

§ 38. Confinement By Physical Barriers

The confinement may be by actual or apparent physical barriers.

第38條以有形之物理障礙所致之人身拘禁

拘禁得以實際或表面上顯示之有形之物理障礙為之。

§ 39. Confinement By Physical Force
The confinement may be by overpowering physical force, or by submission to physical force.

第39條以有形力量方式拘禁
拘禁得以強大有形力量方式或藉力量使屈服方式為之。

§ 40. Confinement By Threats Of Physical Force
The confinement may be by submission to a threat to apply physical force to the other's person immediately upon the other's going or attempting to go beyond the area in which the actor intends to confine him.

第40條以有形威脅方式拘禁

行為人意圖拘禁他人於一定區域內，威脅該他人於離開或企圖離開一定區域時，立即施以有形力量，而他方屈服時，拘禁即成立。

§ 40A. Confinement By Other Duress
The confinement may be by submission to duress other than threats of physical force, where such duress is sufficient to make the consent given ineffective to bar the action.

第40A條以其他脅迫方式拘禁

以力量威脅以外之脅迫方式而致他方屈服時，如該其他脅迫方式不符合「自願受拘禁」之例外情形時，亦成立拘禁。

§ 41. Confinement By Asserted Legal Authority

(1)The confinement may be by taking a person into custody under an asserted legal authority.

(2)The custody is complete if the person against whom and in whose presence the authority is asserted believes it to be valid, or is in doubt as to its validity, and submits to it.

第41條依聲稱法律權威方式拘禁

(1)拘禁得依聲稱法律權威而將他人羈押方式為之。

(2)他人於行為人聲稱法律權威時，相信該法律權威有效，或雖懷疑其效力，但仍屈服時，其羈押行為即完成。

§ 42. Knowledge Of Confinement

Under the rule stated in § 35, there is no liability for intentionally confining another unless the person physically restrained knows of the confinement or is harmed by it.

第42條受拘禁之意識

受拘禁人具有受拘禁之意識，或受拘禁人受傷害時，行為人方就其意圖拘禁他人之行為依第35條之規定負責。

§ 43. Act Intended To Affect Third Parties

If an act done with the intention of affecting a third person imposes a confinement upon another, the actor is subject to liability to such other as fully as though it were intended so to affect him.

第43條原擬拘禁第三人之行為

行為人以拘禁第三人之故意而拘禁他人時，行為人應就有如故意拘禁該他人負責。

§ 44. Malice

If an act which causes another's confinement is done with the intention of causing the confinement, the actor is subject to liability although his act is not inspired by personal hostility or desire to offend.

第44條惡毒之故意

行為人之行為係基於拘禁他人之故意而完成拘禁他人時，縱然其行為並非因仇視或冒犯之欲望而激起，仍應負責。

§ 45. Refusal To Release Or To Aid In Escape

If the actor is under a duty to release the other from confinement, or to aid in such release by providing a means of escape, his refusal to do so with the intention of confining the other is a sufficient act of confinement to make him subject to liability.

第45條拒絕釋放或拒絕協助脫離

行為人有釋放他人或協助他人脫離、釋放之責任，而以拘禁他人之故意，拒絕為之者，即為拘禁之行為，行為人應負責任。

§45A. Instigating Or Participating In False Imprisonment

One who instigates or participates in the unlawful confinement of another is subject to liability to the other for false imprisonment.

第45A條教唆或幫助非法拘禁

教唆或幫助非法拘禁他人者，亦應負非法拘禁他人之責。

Topic 5. The Interest In Freedom From Emotional Distress

§ 46. Outrageous Conduct Causing Severe Emotional

Distress

(1)One who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another is subject to liability for such emotional distress, and if bodily harm to the other results from it, for such bodily harm.

(2)Where such conduct is directed at a third person, the actor is subject to liability if he intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress

(a) to a member of such person's immediate family who is present at the time, whether or not such distress results in bodily harm, or

(b) to any other person who is present at the time, if such distress results in bodily harm.

第五節免於受精神上痛苦之自由之利益

第46條致嚴重精神痛苦之極端無理之行為

(1)行為人故意或魯莽棄置不顧地，以極端無理之行為致他人受嚴重之精神上痛苦，應就該精神上痛苦負責；如因之而致身體上傷害時，亦應就該身體上傷害負責。

(2)行為人向第三人施以極端無理之行為，如符合下列要件時，亦應負責：

(a) 行為人係以致該第三人之在現場最近親屬受嚴重，而無論其是否造成身體傷害；

(b) 行為人係以致其他在現場之任何第三人。

§ 47. Conduct Intended To Invade Other Interests But Causing Emotional Distress

Except as stated in §§ 21-34, and in § 46, conduct which is tortuous because intended to result in bodily harm to another or in the invasion of any other of his legally protected interests does not make the actor liable for an emotional distress which is the only legal consequence of his conduct.

第47條意圖侵害他人之其他利益，卻致精神痛苦行為人之行為係意圖致他人受身體傷害或其他法律保護利益之侵害，而該行為之唯一法律效果為致他人受精神上傷害時，除本法第21條至第34條及第46條另有規定外，行為人不負責任。

§ 48. Special Liability Of Public Utility For Insults By Servants

A common carrier or other public utility is subject to liability to patrons utilizing its facilities for gross insults which reasonably offend them, inflicted by the utility's servants while otherwise acting within the scope of their employment.

第48條公用事業就其受僱人之傲慢無禮行為應負之特別責任

人民於使用公共運輸工具或其他公用事業設備時，受到該公用事業之受僱人於其執行職務範圍內之重大傲慢無禮行為而受到一般人於其處境下亦將遭受之冒犯時，該公用事業應負責任。

Chapter 3. Privilege Arising From Consent To Intended Invasions Of Interests Of Personality

§ 49. Effect Of Consent

The rules stated in § 892A as to the effect of consent to the invasion of an interest apply to the intentional invasion of interests of personality.

第三章因他人同意故意侵犯人身利益而免責之特殊權利

第49條同意之效力

第892A條關於就某種利益受侵犯之同意之效力的有關規定，於故意侵犯人身利益時之同意，亦有其適用。

§ 50. Apparent Consent

The rule stated in § 892(2) as to apparent consent to the invasion of an interest applies to the intentional invasion of interests of personality.

第50條表面上之同意

第892條第(2)項關於就某種利益受侵犯之表面上之同意的效力，於故意侵犯人身利益之同意，亦有其適用。

§ 51. Consent: By Whom Given

The rule stated in § 892A as to the person by whom consent must be given applies to the intentional invasion of interests of personality.

第51條同意─由誰作成之同意

第892A條關於同意應由誰授與之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

§ 52. Consent: To Whom Given

The rule stated in § 892A as to the person to whose conduct must be given applies to intentional invasions of interests of personality.

第52條同意─向誰作成同意

第892A條關於就其行為所授與同意之對象之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

§ 53. Consent To Particular Conduct

The rule stated in § 892A(2) as to consent to the particular conduct applies to intentional invasions of interests of personality.

第53條就特定行為之同意

第892A條第(2)項關於就特定行為之同意之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

§ 54. Assent To Substantially Similar Invasion

[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 892A(2).]

第54條對於實質上大致類似之侵犯之同意

【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第892A條(2)】

§ 55. Fraud Or Mistake As To Harmful Or Offensive Character Of Contact

The rule stated in § 892B(1) as to consent induced by fraud or mistake as to the essential character of conduct applies to fraud or mistake as to the harmful or offensive character of a contact.

第55條關於傷害性或冒犯性觸擊詐欺或錯誤

第892B條第(1)項關於行為之主要性質因詐欺或錯誤而誘使同意之規定，對於傷害性或冒犯性觸擊之詐欺或錯誤，亦有其適用。

§ 56. Fraud Or Mistake As To Validity Of Purported Legal Authority

The rule stated in § 892B(3) as to consent induced by fraud or mistake as to the validity of a purported legal authority applies to intentional invasions of interests of personality.

第56條關於聲稱為法律授權之效力之詐欺或錯誤

第892B條第(3)項關於聲稱為法律授權之效力依詐欺或錯誤而誘使同意之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

§ 57. Fraud Or Mistake As To Collateral Matter

The rule stated in § 892B(2) as to consent induced by fraud or mistake as to a collateral matter not affecting the essential character of the conduct applies to intentional invasions of interests of personality.

第57條關於附屬情事之詐欺或錯誤

第892B條第(2)項關於就不影響行為之主要性質之附屬情事，有詐欺或錯誤而誘使同意之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

§ 58. Consent Under Duress

The rule stated in § 892B(4) as to consent given under duress applies to intentional invasions of interests of personality.

第58條脅迫下之同意

第892B條第(4)項關於受脅迫而作同意之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

§ 59. Incapacity To Consent

The rule stated in § 892A(2) as to incapacity to consent applies to intentional invasions of interests of personality.

第59條同意能力之欠缺

第892A條第(2)項關於同意能力之欠缺之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

§ 60. Consent To Invasion Constituting Crime

The general rule stated in § 892C(1) as to consent to invasions constituting a crime applies to intentional invasions of interests of personality.

第60條構成犯罪之侵犯之同意

第892C條第(1)項關於構成犯罪之侵犯之同意之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

§ 61. Consent To Invasions Made Criminal For Protection Of Particular Class

The exception stated in § 892C(2) as to consent to invasions made criminal for the protection of a particular class applies to intentional invasions of interests of personality.

第61條為保護特定類級人士之利益，同意受侵犯亦構成犯罪第892C條第(2)項之但書關於為保護特定類級人士之利益而於同意受侵犯亦構成犯罪之同意之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

§ 62. When Consent Not Necessary

The rule stated in § 892D as to when consent is not necessary applies to intentional invasions of interests of personality.

第62條同意並非必要之情形

第892D條關於同意並非必要時之同意之規定，於故意侵犯人身利益，亦有其適用。

Chapter 4. Defenses Of Person, Land, And Chattels-Recaption

Topic 1. Self-Defense And Defense Of Third Persons

§ 63. Self–Defense By Force Not Threatening Death Or Serious Bodily Harm

(1)An actor is privileged to use reasonable force, not intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm, to defend himself against unprivileged harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harm which he reasonably believes that another is about to inflict intentionally upon him.

(2)Self-defense is privileged under the conditions stated in Subsection (1), although the actor correctly or reasonably believes that he can avoid the necessity of so defending himself,

(a) by retreating or otherwise giving up a right or privilege, or

(b) by complying with a command with which the actor is under no duty to comply or which the other is not privileged to enforce by the means threatened.

第四章人身、土地之防衛及動產之取回

第一節自行防衛及為第三人之防衛

第63條以不致他人於死或重傷之虞之力量而自行防衛

(1)就其合理相信之他人故意致其受傷害性或冒犯性觸擊之非得免責之行為，得以非故意或可能遭致死或重傷之合理方式，以防衛自己。

(2)於前項之情形，行為人縱然正確地相信或合理地相信原得不須使用上述之力量而依下列之方式以自行防衛，仍得行使自行防衛：

(a) 退卻或其他拋棄權利或特殊權利；

(b) 服從行為人原毋須服從之命令或服從他人原無特殊權利以威脅方式而執行命令。

§ 64. Self–Defense Against Negligent Conduct

(1)Except as stated in Subsection (2), an actor is privileged to use reasonable force, not intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm, to defend himself against harmful or offensive contact or bodily harm which he reasonably believes to be threatened by the conduct of another, although he recognizes such conduct to be negligent.

(2)The actor is not privileged so to defend himself if he knows or should know that he can escape the necessity of doing so by retreating, or by giving up the exercise of a right or privilege which, under the circumstances, it is reasonable to require him to relinquish.

第64條就過失行為之自行防衛

(1)除本條第2項規定外，行為人對於其合理地相信因他人之行為之威脅而有傷害性或冒犯性觸擊或身體傷害之虞者，縱然行為人也確認該行為係過失行為，仍得以非故意或可能致人於死或重傷之力量，自行防衛。

(2)行為人明知或應知，依其情況行為人應退卻或放棄施行其權利或特殊權利，因而有免除使用力量以自行防衛之必要時，不得主張自行防衛。

§ 65. Self–Defense By Force Threatening Death Or Serious Bodily Harms

(1)Subject to the statement in Subsection (3), an actor is privileged to defend himself against another by force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm, when he reasonably believes that

(a) the other is about to inflict upon him an intentional contact or other bodily harm, and that

(b) he is thereby put in peril of death or serious bodily harm or ravishment, which can safely be prevented only by the immediate use of such force.

(2)The privilege stated in Subsection (1) exists although the actor correctly or reasonably believes that he can safely avoid the necessity of so defending himself by

(a) retreating if he is attacked within his dwelling place, which is not also the dwelling place of the other, or

(b) permitting the other to intrude upon or dispossess him of his dwelling place, or

(3)The privilege stated in Subsection (1) does not exist if the actor correctly or reasonably believes that he can with complete safety avoid the necessity of so defending himself by

(a) retreating if attacked in any place other than his dwelling place, or in a place which is also the dwelling of the other, or

(b) relinquishing the exercise of any right or privilege other than his privilege to prevent intrusion upon or dispossession of his dwelling place or to effect a lawful arrest.

第65條以有致人於死或重傷之虞之力量而自行防衛

(1)除本條第3項另有規定外，行為人於下列情形時，為防止他人之侵犯，得使用致他人於死亡或重傷之力量：

(a) 行為人合理地相信他人將施以故意之觸擊或其他身體傷害；並且

(b) 行為人因而受到死亡、重傷或強姦之危險，而僅能以立即使用此種之力量，方能避免。

(2)本條第1項所規定之自行防衛之特殊權利，縱然行為人正確地或合理地相信得依下列方式安全地避免其作此種自行防衛之必要，仍得主張此種特殊權利：

(a) 如於行為人之居住處所，但該處所並非他人之居住處所，受前述之攻擊時，行為人之退卻；或

(b) 准許他人侵入其居住處所或准許他人將行為人逐出其居住處所；或

(3)本條第1項所規定之自行防衛之特殊權利，如行為人正確地或合理地相信得依下列方式安全地避免其作此種自行防衛之必要，不得主張此種免責特殊權利：

(a) 如於行為人之居住處所以外之其他地區或於他人之居住處所，受前述之攻擊時，行為人之退卻；或

(b) 行為人之就防止他人侵入其居住處所或受逐出其居住處所或放棄合法逮捕他人以外之其他權利或特殊權利之放棄。

§ 66. Self–Defense Against Negligent Conduct Threatening Death Or Serious Bodily Harm
One is privileged to use force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm to defend himself against conduct of another which he recognizes as negligent if, but only if, he reasonably believes that the other's conduct will cause him death or serious bodily harm which can be prevented only by the use of such force.

第66條就有致人於死或重傷之虞之過失行為之自行防衛

行為人確認他人之行為，但行為人合理地相信該他人之行為將致其死亡或重傷，惟有依其意圖或可能致人於死或重傷之力量方能避免時，行為人有行使此種力量以自行防衛之免責特殊權利。

§ 67. Assault Or Imprisonment In Self–Defense
The actor is privileged intentionally to confine another or to put him in apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact for the purpose of preventing him from inflicting a harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harm upon the actor, under the same conditions which create a privilege to inflict a harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harm upon the other for the same purpose.

第67條因自行防衛而恫嚇或拘禁他人

為防止他人作傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊或其他身體傷害，行為人得故意拘禁他人或使其受傷害性或冒犯性觸擊之憂慮之免責特殊權利。在同樣之情況下，為自行防衛，行為人得使該他人受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊或其他身體傷害之免責特殊權利。

§ 68. Self–Defense Against Confinement

The actor is privileged to use any means of self-defense to protect himself against confinement which he is privileged to use to protect himself against a harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harm.

第68條就拘禁之自行防衛

就他人之為防止其他人作傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊或其他身體傷害之自行防衛，而將行為人拘禁者，行為人得以任何方式自行防衛。

§ 69. Effect Of Actor's Consent

If the actor has consented to any particular bodily contact, or any other invasion of his interests of personality, he is not privileged to defend himself against such an invasion unless his consent was obtained by fraud or has been withdrawn; but he retains his normal privilege of self-defense against any contact or invasion not included within his consent.

第69條行為人之同意效力

行為人就特定之身體觸擊或其他人身利益之侵犯，曾經同意者，不得就該侵犯，行使自行防衛之特殊權利；但其同意係因受詐欺而作成，或已撤回其同意者，不在此限。行為人就其同意範圍以外之其他任何觸擊或侵犯，得行使自行防衛之免責特殊權利。

§ 70. Character And Extent Of Force Permissible

(1)The actor is not privileged to use any means of self-defense which is intended or likely to cause a bodily harm or confinement in excess of that which the actor correctly or reasonably believes to be necessary for his protection.

(2)The actor may be privileged in self-defense to do an act which is intended to put another in immediate apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harm or a confinement, which is in excess of that which the actor is privileged to inflict, if his act is intended and reasonably believed by him to be likely to do no more than to create such an apprehension.

第70條得行使之力量之性質及程度

(1)行為人因自行防衛而行使之防衛方式係以故意或可能致身體傷害或非法拘禁者，不得逾越行為人正確地或合理地相信為自行防衛所必要之範圍。

(2)行為人因自行防衛而意圖致他人受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊之憂慮或其他身體受傷害、受拘禁之憂慮，如行為人之行為係為基於其故意，而且合理地相信不致發生較此種憂慮更為嚴重之侵犯時，縱然行為人之行為逾越其自行防衛所必要

之範圍，亦毋須負責。

§ 71. Force In Excess Of Privilege

If the actor applies a force to or imposes a confinement upon another which is in excess of that which is privileged,

(a) the actor is liable for only so much of the force or confinement as is excessive;

(b) the other's liability for an invasion of any of the actor's interests of personality which the other may have caused is not affected;

(c) the other has the normal privilege stated in this Topic to defend himself against the actor's use or attempted use of excessive force or confinement.

第71條逾越自行防衛所允許之力量之程度行為人之行為逾越自行防衛所允許之武力或所允許之拘禁他人時，

(a) 行為人僅就其逾越之力量或逾越之拘禁負責；

(b) 他人如侵犯行為人之人身利益時，該他人應負之責任，不因而受影響；

§ 72. Defense Against Privileged Action

The actor is not privileged to defend himself against any force or confinement which the other is privileged for any purpose to inflict upon the actor except where the other's privilege is based upon a reasonable mistake of fact not caused by the fault of the actor.

第72條就具有免責特殊權利之行為之防衛他人基於特殊權利而施行之力量或拘禁，行為人無行使自行防衛之免責之特殊權利。但他人之免責特殊權利係基於非行為人過失所致之合理事實錯誤而行之者，不在此限。

§ 73. Harmful Contact In Defense Against Harm Threatened Otherwise Than By Other

The intentional infliction upon another of substantial bodily harm, or of a confinement involving substantial pecuniary loss, for the purpose of protecting the actor from a threat of harm or confinement not caused by the conduct of the other, is not privileged when the harm threatened to the actor is not disproportionately greater than the harm to the other.

第73條就他人以外之人之傷害性而對他人作傷害性觸擊之防衛就非他人之行為而致之受傷害或拘禁之威脅，如該威脅並非不相稱地較行為人致他人所受傷害為嚴重時，行為人故意致它人受相當重大之身體傷害或致相當重大金錢損失之拘禁者，不得主張自行防衛之免責特殊權利。

§ 74. Harmless Contact In Defense Against Harm

Threatened Otherwise Than By Other

(1)The intentional infliction upon another of an offensive bodily contact or a substantially harmless invasion of any other interest of personality is privileged for the purpose of protecting the actor from a substantial bodily harm or a substantial confinement involving pecuniary loss which is threatened otherwise than by the other, if inflicted under the conditions stated in §§ 63 or 64.

(2)The actor is subject to liability for any bodily harm or pecuniary loss caused by the exercise of the privilege stated in Subsection (1), although his act was not intended to cause such harm or loss and was not negligent as involving an unreasonable risk of so resulting.

第74條就他人以外之傷害威脅而對他人作不具傷害性觸擊之防衛

(1)行為人就他人以外之其他人於第63條或第64條所堆積之情形下，所致之相當重大之身體傷害或相當嚴重之金錢損失之拘禁之威脅，而致他人受冒犯性之身體觸擊或實質上無傷害之其他人身利益之侵犯時，得主張自行防衛之免責特殊權利。

(2)行為人因行使前項所述之自行防衛之免責特殊權利而致之身體傷害或金錢損失，縱然並無致此種傷害或損失之故意或就造成不合理危險並無過失，仍應對之負責。

§ 75. Liability To Third Person

An act which is privileged for the purpose of protecting the actor from a harmful or offensive contact or other invasion of his interests of personality subjects the actor to liability to a third person for any harm unintentionally done to him only if the actor realizes or should realize that his act creates an unreasonable risk of causing such harm.

第75條對第三人之責任

行為人為避免傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊或其他人身利益之侵犯而行使自行防衛之免責特殊權利，如其行為致第三人受非故意之傷害時，僅於行為人知悉或應知其行為有致此種傷害之不合理危險之範圍內，方須負責。

§ 76. Defense Of Third Person

The actor is privileged to defend a third person from a harmful or offensive contact or other invasion of his interests of personality under the same conditions and by the same means as those under and by which he is privileged to defend himself if the actor correctly or reasonably believes that

(a) the circumstances are such as to give the third person a privilege of self-defense, and

(b) his intervention is necessary for the protection of the third person.

第76條為第三人之防衛

行為人正確地或合理地相信下列兩種情形存在時，為防止第三人受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊或其他人身利益之侵犯，有為自行防衛之同樣條件、同樣方式，以行使防衛之免責特殊權利：
(a) 其客觀情況為該第三人有主張自行防衛之免責特殊權利；
(b) 行為人之介入係為保護該第三人之必要。

Topic 2. Defense Of Actor's Interest In His Exclusive

Possession Of Land And Chattels

§ 77. Defense Of Possession By Force Not Threatening

Death Or Serious Bodily Harm

An actor is privileged to use reasonable force, not intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm, to prevent or terminate another's intrusion upon the actor's land or chattels, if

(a) the intrusion is not privileged or the other intentionally or negligently causes the actor to believe that it is not privileged, and

(b) the actor reasonably believes that the intrusion can be prevented or terminated only by the force used, and

(c) the actor has first requested the other to desist and the other has disregarded the request, or the actor reasonably believes that a request will be useless or that substantial harm will be done before it can be made.

第二節行為人為保護其土地及動產之專有占有而防衛

第77條以不致人於死或重傷之虞之力量而防衛占有行為人於下列情形時，得使用不致人於死或重傷之合理力量以防止或中止他人之侵入其土地或侵犯其動產
(a) 其侵入或侵犯並非依法享有之免責特殊權利，或他人之故意或過失致行為人相信其侵入或侵犯，並非依法享有之免責特殊權利；並且

(b) 行為人合理地相信其侵入或侵犯如非依其使用之力量，無法防止或中止；並且

§ 78. Effect Of Other's Mistake

The privilege intentionally to inflict upon another a harmful or offensive bodily contact or other bodily harm for the purpose of preventing or terminating the other's intrusion upon the actor's possession of land or chattels is not affected by the fact that the other reasonably but mistakenly believes that he has a right or privilege to intrude, unless the actor intentionally or negligently causes the other's mistake.

第78條他人之錯誤占有之效力

行為人為防止或中止他人之侵入其土地或侵犯其動產之占有，得故意致他人受傷害性或冒犯性之身體觸擊或其他身體傷害之免責特殊權利，並不因他人之合理卻錯誤地相信其有權利或特殊權利侵入或侵犯他人之土地或動產，而受影響。但行為人之故意或過失而致他人錯誤者，不在此限。

§ 79. Defense Of Possession By Force Threatening Death Or

Serious Bodily Harm

The intentional infliction upon another of a harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harm by a means which is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm, for the purpose of preventing or terminating the other's intrusion upon the actor's possession of land or chattels, is privileged if, but only if, the actor reasonably believes that the intruder, unless expelled or excluded, is likely to cause death or serious bodily harm to the actor or to a third person whom the actor is privileged to protect.

第79條以有致人於死或重傷之虞之力量而防衛占有為防止或中止他人之侵入土地或侵犯其動產之占有，而以意圖致人於死或重傷或有此種可能之方式而故意致他人受傷害性、冒犯性觸擊或身體傷害，行為人有而且只有在下列情形時，方能主張此種之防衛之免責特殊權利：行為人合理地相信除非將侵入或侵犯者驅走或避免其進入，有可能致行為人或行為人有特殊權利以保護之第三人，受死亡或重傷之虞。

§ 80. Assault Or Imprisonment In Defense Against

Intrusion

The actor is privileged intentionally to confine another or to put him in apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact for the purpose of preventing or terminating the other's intrusion upon the actor's possession of land or chattels under the same conditions as create a privilege to inflict a harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harm upon the other for the same purpose.

第80條就非法侵入土地或侵犯動產占有之以恫嚇或非法拘禁防衛行為人為防止或中止他人之侵入其土地或侵犯其動產之占有，於得以傷害性或冒犯性觸擊或其他身體傷害之免責特殊權利之同樣情況下，行使故意拘禁他人或使其致傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊之憂慮之免責特殊權利。

§ 81. Amount Of Force Permissible

(1)The actor is not privileged to use any means of defending his land or chattels from intrusion which are intended or likely to cause bodily harm or confinement in excess of that which the actor correctly or reasonably believes to be necessary to prevent or terminate the other's intrusion.

(2)The actor is privileged in defense of his land or chattels against intrusion to do an act which is intended to put another in immediate apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact or other bodily harm or confinement which is in excess of that which the actor is privileged to inflict, if his act is intended and reasonably believed by him to be likely to do no more than to create such an apprehension.

第81條為防衛而得行使力量之範圍
(1)行為人為防衛其土地或動產之受他人侵入或侵犯而作之行為如係故意或可能致身體傷害或非法拘禁者，就其逾越行為人正確地或合理地相信為防止或中止他人之侵入或侵犯之必要範圍，不得主張免責特殊權利。

(2)行為人為防衛其土地或動產之受他人侵入或侵犯而意圖致他人受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊或其他身體之傷害身體之憂慮或致他人受非法拘禁者，如行為人合理地相信其行為不致造成較此種憂慮更嚴重之後果，而其行為亦有如其意圖而已時，縱然逾越為防衛之必要範圍，不須負責。

§ 82. Effect Of Excessive Force

If the actor applies a force to or imposes a confinement upon another which is in excess of that which is privileged,

(a) the actor is liable for so much of the force or confinement as is excessive;

(b) the other's liability for any intrusion upon the actor's land or chattels which the other may have made is not affected;

(c) the other has the privilege to defend himself against the actor's use or attempted use of excessive force or confinement.

第82條逾越必要力量之效力

行為人之行為逾越防衛所允許之力量或所允許之拘禁他人時：

(a) 行為人就其逾越之拘禁負責；

(b) 他人如侵入或侵犯行為人之土地或動產時，該他人應負之責任，不因而受影響；

§ 83. Liability To Third Person

An act which is privileged for the purpose of preventing or terminating another's intrusion upon the actor's possession of land or chattels does not subject the actor to liability to a third person for any harm unintentionally done to him unless the actor realizes or should realize that his act creates an unreasonable risk of causing such harm.

第83條對第三人之責任

行為人為防止或中止他人之侵入或侵犯其土地或動產而行使防衛之免責特殊權利，如其行為致第三人受非故意之傷亡時，僅於行為人知悉或應知悉其行為有致此種傷害之不合理危險之範圍負責。

§ 84. Use Of Mechanical Device Not Threatening Death Or Serious Bodily Harm

The actor is so far privileged to employ, for the purpose of protecting his possession of land or chattels from intrusion, a device not intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm that he is not liable for bodily harm done thereby to a deliberate intruder, if

(a) the use of such a device is reasonably necessary to protect the land or chattels from intrusion, and

(b) the use of the particular device is reasonable under the circumstances, and

(c) the device is one customarily used for such a purpose, or reasonable care is taken to make its use known to probable intruders.

第84條使用不致人於死或重傷之虞之工具

為保護其土地之占有或動產之免受侵犯，而於符合下列規定，以不致人於死或重傷之工具而致侵犯者受到身體傷害者，不負責任：

(a) 使用此種工具係為保護其土地或動產之免受侵犯所必要者；並且

(b) 使用此種特定工具，於其情況下係屬合理；並且

§ 85. Use Of Mechanical Device Threatening Death Or Serious Bodily Harm

The actor is so far privileged to use a device intended or likely to cause serious bodily harm or death for the purpose of protecting his land or chattels from intrusion that he is not liable for the serious bodily harm or death thereby caused to an intruder whose intrusion is,

in fact, such that the actor, were he present, would be privileged to prevent or terminate it by the intentional infliction of such harm.

第85條使用有致人於死或重傷之虞之工具

行為人為保護其土地或動產之免受侵犯而使用有致人於死或重傷之虞之工具，而致侵犯者死亡或重傷者，僅於行為人為避免或終止侵犯者之故意致人於死或重傷之侵權行為之範圍內，始得免責。

§ 86. Defense Against Intrusion On Third Person's Land Or Chattels

The actor is privileged to inflict a harmful or offensive bodily contact or other invasion of another's interests of personality for the purpose

of preventing or terminating the other's intrusion upon a third person's possession of land or chattels under the same conditions and by the same means under and by which he is privileged to make similar invasions of another's interests to prevent or terminate an intrusion upon his own land or chattels, if

(a) the actor correctly or reasonably believes that the circumstancesare such as to give the third person such a privilege, and hisintervention is necessary to protect the third person's possessionfrom intrusion, and

(b) the third person is, or is reasonably believed by the actor to be, amember of his immediate family or household, or a person whosepossession the actor is under a legal duty to protect.

第86條就第三人之土地或動產之受侵犯之防衛

行為人為預防或終止他人之侵犯第三人之土地或動產之占有時，得有如為預防或終止他人之侵犯行為人之土地或動產之占有，於同樣情況下，依同樣之方式而作類似之侵犯他人之權益、就他人因此所受之傷害性、冒犯性之身體觸擊或其他人身利益之侵犯，不負責任；但須符合下列二條件：

(a) 行為人正確地相信或合理地相信其情況使該第三人有同樣之防衛權利，而其干涉係為保護該第三人占有免受侵犯之必要；並且

(b) 該第三人為，或合理地被認為，行為人之家屬或親屬或該他人之占有土地或動產乃行為人有法律上之保護責任。

Topic 3. Defense Of The Actor's Interest In Retaining Possession Of Land Or Chattels

§ 87. Defense Against Dispossessory Acts

The intentional infliction upon another of a harmful or offensive contact or other invasion of the other's interests of personality for the purpose of preventing the other from dispossessing the actor of his land or chattels is privileged to the same extent and under the same conditions as the intentional infliction of such contacts or other invasions for the purpose of preventing an intrusion upon the possession of such land or chattels.

第三節行為人就其土地或動產占有之防衛

第87條就剝奪土地或動產占有行為之防衛

行為人為防止他人剝奪其對於土地或動產之占有而故意致他人受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊或其他人身之侵犯者，其得免責之特殊權利，與為防止他人之侵入或侵犯其土地或動產占有而故意致他人受傷害性或冒犯性之觸擊或其他之侵犯，得於同樣情況下，受同樣程度之特殊權利之保障。