Subtitle III. Abuse Of Privilege
§ 599. General Principle
One who publishes defamatory matter concerning another upon an
第三目 免責之特殊權利之濫用
第599條 一般原則
公布誹謗他人事項而生附條件之免責特殊
occasion giving rise to a conditional privilege is subject to liability to
the other if he abuses the privilege.
權利之場合，如公布者濫用該免責之特殊權
利者，應對該他人負責任。
§ 600. Knowledge Of Falsity Or Reckless Disregard As To
Truth
Except as stated in § 602, one who upon an occasion giving rise to a
conditional privilege publishes false and defamatory matter
concerning another abuses the privilege if he
(a) knows the matter to be false, or
(b) acts in reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity.
第600條 非真實之知悉或魯莽棄置真實
於不顧
除第602條規定外，公布虛偽誹謗性事項而
生附條件之免責特殊權利之場合，如有下列
情形之ㄧ，及未濫用該免責特殊權利：
(a) 公布者知悉所公布之事項虛偽不實；或
(b) 魯莽棄置該公布事項之為虛偽或真實於
不顧而行為(公布)。
§ 601. Lack Of Reasonable Grounds To Believe In Truth
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 600].
第601條 相信其為真實之合理理由之欠
缺
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第600 條】
§ 602. Publication Of Defamatory Rumor
One who upon an occasion giving rise to a conditional privilege
publishes a defamatory rumor or suspicion concerning another does
not abuse the privilege, even if he knows or believes the rumor or
suspicion to be false, if
(a) he states the defamatory matter as rumor or suspicion and not as
fact, and
(b) the relation of the parties, the importance of the interests affected
and the harm likely to be done make the publication reasonable.
第602條 誹謗性謠言之公布
有附條件之免責特殊權利之場合，而公佈對
他人具有誹謗性之謠言或嫌疑，縱然知悉或
相信該謠言或嫌疑係虛偽不實，如符合下列
規定，仍非濫用該附條件之免責特殊權利：
(a) 公布者聲明誹謗性事項為謠言或嫌疑，
而非事實；並且
(b) 就當事人間之關係、受影響利益之重要
性及公布可能導致之傷害等之考慮，認
為其公布係合理者。
§ 603. Purpose Of The Privilege
One who upon an occasion giving rise to a conditional privilege
publishes defamatory matter concerning another abuses the privilege
if he does not act for the purpose of protecting the interest for the
protection of which the privilege is given.
第603條 免責之特殊權利之目的
有附條件之免責特殊權利之場合而公布誹
謗他人之事項，如其公布行為並非為保護賦
與該附條件之免責特殊權利之保護力之目
的者，為濫用免責之特殊權利。
§ 604. Excessive Publication
One who, upon an occasion giving rise to a conditional privilege for
the publication of defamatory matter to a particular person or persons,
knowingly publishes the matter to a person to whom its publication is
not otherwise privileged, abuses the privilege unless he reasonably
believes that the publication is a proper means of communicating the
defamatory matter to the person to whom its publication is privileged.
第604條 逾越必要範圍之公布
向特定之人作誹謗事項之公布而有附條件
之免責特殊權利之人，如明知收受消息者並
非其得享受附條件之免責特殊權利之公布
之對象，而對之公布誹謗事項，即為濫用免
責之特殊權利。但行為人(公布者)合理地相
信，此種之公布為向其享有免責特殊權利之
公布之對象而作傳遞消息之適當方法者，不
在此限。
§ 605. Necessity For Publication And Purpose Of Privilege
One who upon an occasion giving rise to a conditional privilege
publishes defamatory matter concerning another, abuses the privilege
if he does not reasonably believe the matter to be necessary to
accomplish the purpose for which the privilege is given.
第605條 公布之必要與免責之特殊權利
之目的
向他人作誹謗性事項之公布而有附條件之
免責特殊權利者，如公布者無法合理地相信
公布之事項對於賦與該免責之特殊權利之
目的之完成有其必要時，為濫用免責之特殊
權利。
§ 605A. Unprivileged Matter In Addition To Privileged
Matter
One who upon an occasion giving rise to a conditional privilege
publishes defamatory matter concerning another that is within the
privilege, abuses the privilege if he also publishes unprivileged
defamatory matter.
第605A條 免責特殊權利之事項之外之
位具有免責特殊權利之事項
向他人作誹謗性事項之公布而有附條件之
免責特殊權利者，如其亦公布未具有免責特
殊權利之誹謗事項時，為濫用免責之特殊權
利。
Title B. Privileged Criticism ("Fair Comment")
§ 606. General Principle
[Omitted. See § 566.]
第二款 免責之批評(公正評論)
第606條 一般原則
【請見第566 條】
§ 610. Indirect Criticism Of Person By Disparagement Of
Product Or Enterprise
[This Title, including §§ 606-610, has been omitted. A statement of
opinion that does not imply a defamatory statement of fact is no
longer actionable, and no privilege is needed. See § 566. See also §§
580A, 580B.]
第610條 就產品或企業之誹謗而對人之
間接批評
【本款，包括第606條至第610條已經刪除。
意見之陳述而未隱含事實之誹謗性陳述
者，不再得提起誹謗訴訟救濟，也毋須免責
特殊權利之保護。參閱第580A、第580B條】
Title C. Special Types Of Privilege
§ 611. Report Of Official Proceeding Or Public Meeting
The publication of defamatory matter concerning another in a report
of an official action or proceeding or of a meeting open to the public
that deals with a matter of public concern is privileged if the report is
accurate and complete or a fair abridgement of the occurrence
reported.
第三款 免責特殊權利之特別態樣
第611條 公務程序及公開會議之報告
就公務行為、公務程序或公開會議之有關公
眾之報告，而有關於他人之誹謗性事項之公
布者，如該報告為正確、完整之報告或為有
關情況報告之合理刪節，為享有免責特殊權
利之報告。
§ 612. Providing Means Of Publication
(1)One who provides a means of publication of defamatory matter
published by another is privileged to do so if
(a) the other is privileged to publish it, or
第612條 公布方式之提供
(1)就他人以公布之誹謗性事項提供公布之
方式，如符合下列規定之一者，亦享有
免責之特殊權利：
(a) 原公布者就其公布有免責之特殊權
(b) the person providing the means of publication reasonably
believes that the other is privileged to publish it.
(2)A public utility under a duty to transmit messages is privileged to
do so, even though it knows the message to be false and
defamatory, unless
(a) the sender of the message is not privileged to send it, and
(b) the agent who transmits the message knows or has reason to
know that the sender is not privileged to publish it.
利；或
(b) 提供公布方式之人合理地相信，原公
布者就其公布有免責之特殊權利。
(2)公用事業有轉送音信消息之義務者，縱
然知悉音信、消息係虛偽不實且有誹謗
性，有免責之特殊權利。但有下列情形
時，不在此限：
(a) 要求轉送音信、消息之人，就其提交
音信、消息無免責之特殊權利；並且
(b) 轉送消息之代理人知悉或有理由知
悉，提交音信、消息之人無免責之特
殊權利。
Chapter 26. Burden Of Proof And Function Of Judge And
Jury In Actions For Defamation
Topic 1. Burden Of Proof
§ 613. Burden Of Proof
(1)In an action for defamation the plaintiff has the burden of proving,
when the issue is properly raised,
(a) the defamatory character of the communication,
(b) its publication by the defendant,
(c) its application to the plaintiff,
(d) the recipient's understanding of its defamatory meaning,
(e) the recipient's understanding of it as intended to be applied to
the plaintiff,
(f) special harm resulting to the plaintiff from its publication,
(g) the defendant's negligence, reckless disregard or knowledge
regarding the truth or falsity and the defamatory character of
the communication, and
(h) the abuse of a conditional privilege.
(2)In an action for defamation the defendant has the burden of
proving, when the issue is properly raised, the presence of the
circumstances necessary for the existence of a privilege to publish
the defamatory communication.
第二十六章 誹謗訴訟之舉證責任、法官
與陪審團之功能
第一節 舉證責任
第613條 舉證責任
(1)於誹謗訴訟，如下列爭執被提出時，原
告負有舉證之責任：
(a) 傳遞消息之誹謗性質；
(b) 由被告公布；
(c) 係針對原告(而公布)；
(d) 收受消息者之瞭解其誹謗意義；
(e) 收受消息者之瞭解傳遞消息之意圖
係針對原告；
(f) 其公布之致原告受特別傷害；
(g) 就傳遞消息之真實、虛偽不實及誹謗
性質，被告有過失、魯莽棄置不顧或
知悉；
(h) 附條件之免責特殊權利之濫用。
(2)於誹謗訴訟，爭執被提出時，被告就其
享有公布誹謗性傳遞消息之免責特殊權
利，負有舉證責任。
Topic 2. Function Of Court And Jury
§ 614. Determination Of Meaning And Defamatory
Character Of Communication
(1)The court determines
(a) whether a communication is capable of bearing a particular
meaning, and
(b) whether that meaning is defamatory.
(2)The jury determines whether a communication, capable of a
defamatory meaning, was so understood by its recipient.
第二節 法院與陪審團之功能
第614條 傳遞消息之意義與誹謗性質之
決定
(1)法院決定
(a) 傳遞消息之是否可能具有特定意
義；以及
(b) 該意義是否有誹謗性質。
(2)傳遞消息之有可能具有誹謗性質者，陪
審團決定消息之收受者是否瞭解傳遞消
息之具有誹謗性質。
§ 615. Determination Of Slander Actionable Per Se
(1)The court determines whether a crime, a disease or a type of
sexual misconduct imputed by spoken language is of such a
character as to make the slander actionable per se.
(2)Subject to the control of the court whenever the issue arises, the
jury determines whether spoken language imputes to another
conduct, characteristics or a condition incompatible with the
proper conduct of his business, trade, profession or office.
第615條 非文字誹謗訴訟之決定
(1)一犯罪行為、疾病或不當之性行為，已
非文字指責是否構成非文字誹謗而得以
訴訟請求救濟，應由法院決定之。
(2)於爭執發生時，除應受法院指揮外，非
文字之指責他人之行為、品性或條件是
否與其營業、貿易、職業或職位之適宜
行為不相符，應由陪審團決定。
§ 616. Determination Of Damages
The court determines what items of harm suffered by the plaintiff as
the result of the publication of the defamatory matter may be
considered by the jury in assessing damages; the jury determines the
amount of damages to be awarded for those items.
第616條 賠償之決定
因誹謗性事項之公布而陪審團於估計賠償
時，可能列為考慮之原告所受損害之項目，
由法院決定；陪審團決定就這些項目應給予
原告之賠償總額。
§ 617. Publication, Truth And Defendant's Fault
Subject to the control of the court whenever the issue arises, the jury
determines whether
(a) the defamatory matter was published of and concerning the
plaintiff;
(b) the matter was true or false; and
(c) the defendant had the requisite fault in regard to the truth or falsity
of the matter and its defamatory character.
第617條 公布、真實與被告之故意、過
失
除應受法院監督外，下列爭執發生時，由陪
審團決定：
(a) 誹謗性事項是否被公布？是否與原告有
關；
(b) 誹謗性事項是否為真實或虛偽不實；
(c) 就事項之真實或虛偽不實，及其誹謗性
質，被告是否有須具備之故意、過失。
§ 618. Privileged Criticism
[This Section is omitted. A statement of opinion that does not imply a
defamatory statement of fact is no longer actionable. See § 566.]
第618條 免責之批判
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第566條】
§ 619. Privileges
(1)The court determines whether the occasion upon which the
defendant published the defamatory matter gives rise to a
privilege.
(2)Subject to the control of the court whenever the issue arises, the
jury determines whether the defendant abused a conditional
privilege.
第619條 免責之特殊權利
(1)就被告知公布誹謗性事項而致生免責之
特殊權利之場合是否存在，應由法院決
定。
(2)除受法院監督外，於爭執發生時，被告
是否就附條件之免責特殊權利有濫用，
應由陪審團決定。
Chapter 27. Measure Of Damages In Actions For
Defamation
§ 620. Nominal Damages
第二十七章 誹謗訴訟之賠償計算方式
第620條 名義上之賠償
One who is liable for a slander actionable per se or for a libel is liable
for at least nominal damages.
就文字誹謗及毋需證明受特別傷害而當然
得提起訴訟之非文字誹謗，應負責任之人，
至少應負名義上賠償之責任。
§ 621. General Damages
One who is liable for a defamatory communication is liable for the
proved, actual harm caused to the reputation of the person defamed.
第621條 一般之賠償
就誹謗性傳遞消息應負責任之人，對於經證
明之受誹謗人之名譽所受之實際傷害，應負
賠償之責任。
§ 622. Special Harm As Affecting The Measure Of Recovery
One who is liable for either a slander actionable per se or a libel is
also liable for any special harm legally caused by the defamatory
publication.
第622條 影響賠償計算方式之特別傷害
就文字誹謗及毋須證明受特別傷害而當然
得提起訴訟之非文字誹謗，應負責任之人，
對於誹謗性公布而致之特別傷害，亦應負責
任。
§ 622A. Legal Causation Of Special Harm
Defamation is a legal cause of special harm to the person defamed if
(a) it is a substantial factor in bringing about the harm, and
(b) there is no rule of law relieving the publisher from liability
because of the manner in which the publication has resulted in the
harm.
第622A條 特別傷害之法律原因
如符合下列規定，誹謗為致受誹謗人受特別
傷害之法律原因：
(a) 誹謗為至該傷害之重要因素；並且
(b) 法律並未因誹謗之公布而致傷害之公布
方式，免除公布者之責任。
§ 623. Emotional Distress And Resulting Bodily Harm
One who is liable to another for a libel or slander is liable also for
emotional distress and bodily harm that is proved to have been caused
by the defamatory publication.
第623條 精神痛苦與因而致身體傷害
就文字誹謗或非文字誹謗應負責任之人，對
於誹謗性公布而致，且經證明，之精神痛苦
與因而致身體傷害，均須負責任。
Division 6. Injurious Falsehood
Chapter 28. Injurious Falsehood (Including Slander Of
Title And Trade Libel)
Topic 1. General Principle
§ 623A. Liability For Publication Of Injurious
Falsehood—General Principle
One who publishes a false statement harmful to the interests of
another is subject to liability for pecuniary loss resulting to the other if
(a) he intends for publication of the statement to result in harm to
interests of the other having a pecuniary value, or either
recognizes or should recognize that it is likely to do so, and
第六篇 侵害之虛偽不實
第二十八章 有侵害之虛偽不實(包括對
財產之非文字誹謗與交易文字誹謗)
第一章 一般原則
第623A條 有侵害之虛偽不實之公布之
責任一一般原則
公布置他人利益受傷害之不實陳述者，如於
下列規定情況下，就致他人所受之金錢損失
應負責任：
(a) 公布者就該陳述之公布有致他人之金錢
價值之利益受傷害之故意，或認知或應
認知可能受到傷害；而且
(b) he knows that the statement is false or acts in reckless disregard of
its truth or falsity.
(b) 公布者知悉該陳述細虛偽不實，或魯莽
棄置該陳述為真實或虛偽不實於不顧而
公布。
Topic 2. Disparagement Of Property In Or Quality Of
Land, Chattels And Intangible Things
§ 624. Disparagement Of Property—Slander Of Title
The rules on liability for the publication of an injurious falsehood
stated in § 623A apply to the publication of a false statement
disparaging another's property rights in land, chattels or intangible
things, that the publisher should recognize as likely to result in
pecuniary harm to the other through the conduct of third persons in
respect to the other's interests in the property.
第二節 對土地、動產、無形財產之財
產、品質之誹謗
第624條 財產之毀謗
第623A條有關侵害之虛偽不實之責任之規
定，於公布不實說明已毀謗他人於不動產、
動產或無體財產之財產權，亦有其適用。但
公布者應認知經第三人之行為，有關該他人
於該財產之利益將受金錢傷害之可能。
§ 625. Intention—Scienter—Malice
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 623A.]
第625條 故意一惡毒之心
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第623A 條】
§ 626. Disparagement Of Quality—Trade Libel
The rules on liability for the publication of an injurious falsehood
stated in § 623A apply to the publication of matter disparaging the
quality of another's land, chattels or intangible things, that the
publisher should recognize as likely to result in pecuniary loss to the
other through the conduct of a third person in respect to the other's
interests in the property.
第626條 品質之毀謗依依交易之文字誹
謗
第623A條有關侵害之虛偽不實之責任之規
定，於公布不實說明以毀謗他人之不動產、
動產或無形物(財產)之品質者，亦有其適
用。但公布者應認知經第三人之行為，有關
該他人於該財產之利益將受金錢傷害之可
能。
§ 627. Disparaging Statements Of Opinion
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 623A.]
第627條 意見之毀謗陳述
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第623A 條】
§ 628. Intention—Scienter—Malice
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 623A.]
第628條 故意一惡毒之心
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第623A 條】
§ 629. Disparagement Defined
A statement is disparaging if it is understood to cast doubt upon the
quality of another's land, chattels or intangible things, or upon the
existence or extent of his property in them, and
(a) the publisher intends the statement to cast the doubt, or
(b) the recipient's understanding of it as casting the doubt was
第629條 毀謗之意義
陳述之毀謗，係指陳述被瞭解為使人懷疑他
人之不動產、動產或無體財產之品質，或使
人懷疑他人於不動產、動產或無體財產之財
產權之存在與範圍；並且有下列兩種情形之一：
(a) 公布者有使該陳述致懷疑之故意；或
(b) (消息之)收受者之瞭解公布者之使懷疑
reasonable. 之陳述，係合理(之現象)。
Topic 3. Rules Applicable To All Publication Of Injurious
Falsehood
§ 630. Publication
Publication of an injurious falsehood is its communication
intentionally or by a negligent act to someone other than the person
whose interest is affected.
第三節 有侵害之虛偽不實之公布均得
適用之法律規則
第630條 公布
有侵害之虛偽不實說明之公布，係指其傳遞
消息為故意或過失行為傳遞於其利益受影
響以外之第三人。
§ 631. Repetition
One who publishes an injurious falsehood is subject to liability for
harm resulting from its repetition by a third person if, but only if,
(a) the repetition was authorized or intended by the original publisher,
or
(b) the third person was privileged to repeat it, or
(c) the repetition was reasonably to be expected.
第631條 重複
就有侵害之虛偽不實之公布，如於下列情形
之ㄧ，但也僅限於下列情形之一，因第三人
之重複公布所致之傷害，亦應負責任：
(a) 重複有侵害之虛偽不實之公布係經原
(最初)公布者之授權或為原公布者之意
圖而為；或
(b) 第三人之重複公布，有免責之特殊權
利；或
(c) 第三人之重複公布，係合理之預期發
生。
§ 632. Legal Causation Of Pecuniary Loss
The publication of an injurious falsehood is a legal cause of pecuniary
loss if
(a) it is a substantial factor in bringing about the loss, and
(b) there is no rule of law relieving the publisher from liability
because of the manner in which the publication has resulted in the
loss.
第632條 金錢損失之因果關係
有侵害之虛偽不實之公布於下列情形者，為
金錢損失之法律原因：
(a) 有侵害之虛偽不實之公布為致金錢損失
之重要因素；並且
(b) 公布者之公布方式而致金錢損失，並無
使公布者享有免責特殊權利之法律規
則。
§ 633. Pecuniary Loss
(1)The pecuniary loss for which a publisher of injurious falsehood is
subject to liability is restricted to
(a) the pecuniary loss that results directly and immediately from
the effect of the conduct of third persons, including
impairment of vendibility or value caused by disparagement,
and
(b) the expense of measures reasonably necessary to counteract
the publication, including litigation to remove the doubt cast
upon vendibility or value by disparagement.
(2)This pecuniary loss may be established by
(a) proof of the conduct of specific persons, or
(b) proof that the loss has resulted from the conduct of a number
第633條 金錢損失
(1)有侵害之虛偽不實之公布者應負責任之
金錢損失僅限於
(a) 因第三人行為效力所致之直接、立即
發生之金錢損失，包括因毀謗所致價
值、可買賣性之損害；以及
(b) 為應付有侵害之虛偽不實之公布而
支出之必要費用，包括為消除因毀謗
而致價值或可買賣性懷疑而提起訴
訟之費用。
(2)此種金錢損失可依下列方式而證明：
(a) 特定人之行為之證明；或
(b) 無法辨認之ㄧ群人之行為而致之損
of persons whom it is impossible to identify. 失之證明。
§ 634. Truth
The publisher of a statement injurious to another is not liable for
injurious falsehood if the facts stated, or implied as justification for an
opinion stated, are true.
第634條 真實
侵害他人陳述之公布者，如所陳述之事實或
作為陳述意見合理之隱含事實，係為真實
者，毋須就其有侵害之陳述負責任。
Topic 4. Privileges To Publish Injurious Falsehood
§ 635. Absolute Privileges
The rules on absolute privilege to publish defamatory matter stated in
§§ 583 to 592A apply to the publication of an injurious falsehood.
第四節 公布有侵害之虛偽不實之免責
特殊權利
第635條 絕對免責之特殊權利
第583條至第592A條關於公布誹謗性事項
之絕對免責之特殊權利之規定，於有侵害之
虛偽不實之公布，亦有其適用。
§ 636. Absolute Privilege Of Witnesses In Judicial
Proceedings
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 635.]
第636條 司法程序之證人之絕對免責之
特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第635條】
§ 637. Absolute Privilege Of Attorneys
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 635.]
第637條 律師之絕對免責之特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第635 條】
§ 638. Absolute Privilege Of Parties To Litigation
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 635.]
第638條 訴訟當事人之絕對免責之特殊
權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第635 條】
§ 639. Absolute Privilege Of Jurors
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 635.]
第639條 陪審員之絕對免責之特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第635 條】
§ 640. Absolute Privilege Of Members Of Legislative Bodies
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 635.]
第640條 立法機關之立法者之絕對免責
之特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第635 條】
§ 641. Absolute Privilege Of Executive Officers
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 635.]
第641條 行政人員之絕對免責之特殊權
利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第635 條】
§ 642. Absolute Privilege Of Husband And Wife
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 635.]
第642條 夫妻間之絕對免責之特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第635條】
§ 643. Special Conditional Privilege For Transmission Of
Messages By Public Utility
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 646A.]
第643條 公用事業就傳遞訊息、音信之
特別附條件之免責特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第646A 條】
§ 644. Special Conditional Privilege Of Persons Publishing
Reports Of Judicial, Legislative And Executive Proceedings
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 646A.]
第644條 公布司法、立法及行政機關之
程序之報告之人所享有之特別附條件之
免責特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第646A 條】
§ 645. Privilege Of Public Officers
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by §§ 635 and
646A.]
第645條 公務員之免責特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第635 條及第
646A 條】
§ 646. Privilege Based On Consent To Publication
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 635.]
第646條 本於同意公布之免責特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第635 條】
§ 646A. Conditional Privileges
The rules on conditional privileges to publish defamatory matter
stated in §§ 594 to 598A and on the special privileges stated in §§ 611
and 612 apply to the publication of an injurious falsehood.
第646A條 附條件之免責特殊權利
第594條至第598A條關於公布誹謗事項之
附條件之免責特殊權利規定及第611條及第
612條關於特殊型態之免責特殊權利之規
定，於有侵害之虛偽不實之公布，亦有其適
用。
§ 647. Conditional Privilege Of Rival Claimant
A rival claimant is conditionally privileged to disparage another's
property in land, chattels or intangible things by an assertion of an
inconsistent legally protected interest in himself.
第647條 主張權利之訴訟他方當事人之
附條件之免責特殊權利
主張權利之訴訟他方當事人為主張其有受
法律保護之權力於不動產、動產或無體財
產，對於另一方當事人於該不動產、動產或
無體財產之財產毀謗者，有附條件之免責特
殊權利。
§ 648. Conditional Privilege Of One Seeking To Protect
Third Person Against Loss
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 646A.]
第648條 為保護第三人免受損失之人之
附條件之免責特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第646A條】
§ 649. Conditional Privilege Of Competitors
A competitor is conditionally privileged to make an unduly favorable
comparison of the quality of his own land, chattels or other things,
with the quality of the competing land, chattels or other things of a
rival competitor, although he does not believe that his own things are
superior to those of the rival competitor, if the comparison does not
contain false assertions of specific unfavorable facts regarding the
rival competitor's things.
第649條 競爭者之附條件之免責特殊權
利
競爭者就其土地、動產或其他物之品質，與
他方之土地、動產或其他物之品質比較而作
不當之有利於己之比較，縱然不相信其自己
之物較他方之物為佳，只要其比較並未做不
利於他方之物之特定不利事實之虛偽不實
之認定者，享有附條件之免責特殊權利。
§ 650. Conditional Privilege Of One Seeking To Protect
Health, Safety Or Property Interests Of Recipient Or Third
Person
[The Section is omitted. The matter is now covered by § 646A. See
also § 595.]
第650條 為保護(保護之)收受者、第三
人之健康、安全或財產利益之人之附條
件之免責特殊權利
【本條刪除；有關事項規定於第646A 條，
並請參閱第595 條之規定】
§ 650A. Abuse Of Conditional Privilege
Except as otherwise stated in §§ 647 and 649, a conditional privilege
to publish injurious falsehood is abused under circumstances that
amount to an abuse of a conditional privilege to publish defamation.
第650A條 附條件之免責特殊權利之濫
用
除第647及第649條另有規定外，公布有侵害
之虛偽不實而享有附條件之免責特殊權利
者，如其情況相當於公布誹謗事項而享有附
條件之免責特殊權利濫用時，亦為濫用
Topic 5. Burden Of Proof And Functions Of Court And
Jury
§ 651. Burden Of Proof
(1)In an action for injurious falsehood the plaintiff has the burden of
proving, when the issue is properly raised,
(a) the existence and extent of the legally protected interest of the
plaintiff affected by the falsehood;
(b) the injurious character of the falsehood;
(c) the falsity of the statement;
(d) publication of the falsehood;
(e) that the circumstances under which the publication was made
were such as to make reliance on it by a third person
reasonably foreseeable;
(f) the recipient's understanding of the communication in its
injurious sense;
(g) the recipient's understanding of the communication as
applicable to the plaintiff's interests;
(h) the pecuniary loss resulting from the publication;
(i) the defendant's knowledge of the falsity of the statement or his
reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity;
第五節 舉證責任、法院與陪審團之功能
第651條 舉證責任
(1)於有侵害之虛偽不實訴訟，如下列爭執
被提出時，原告負有舉證之責任：
(a) 原告之法律保護之利益，因虛偽不實
而受影響之存在及其程度；
(b) 虛偽不實之有侵害性質；
(c) 陳述之虛偽不實；
(d) 虛偽不實之公布；
(e) 公布之客觀情況至得合理預測使第
三人信賴該公布；
(f) 收受者就傳遞消息係已有侵害之意
義而瞭解；
(g) 收受者之瞭解該傳遞消息係得運用
於原告之利益；
(h) 因公布而致金錢損失；
(i) 被告之知悉陳述之虛偽不實，或被告
之魯莽棄置其真實或虛偽不實於不顧；
(j) the defendant's motivation of ill will;
(k) the defendant's intent to affect plaintiff's interests in an
unprivileged manner; and
(l) abuse of a conditional privilege.
(2)The defendant has the burden of proving, when the issue is
properly raised, that the publication was absolutely or
conditionally privileged.
(j) 被告知惡意動機；
(k) 被告以無免責之特殊權利之方式而
影響原告利益之意圖；
(l) 附條件之免責特殊權利之濫用；
(2)於有侵害之虛偽不實訴訟，爭執被提出
時，被告就其公布虛偽不實，享有絕對
附條件之免責特殊權利，負舉證責任。
§ 652. Function Of Court And Jury
(1)In an action for injurious falsehood, the court determines,
(a) whether the statement is capable of a disparaging or other
injurious meaning;
(b) whether the interest of the plaintiff that the statement has
affected is entitled to legal protection;
(c) whether any loss that the plaintiff has suffered is sufficient to
support a cause of action;
(d) whether any particular item of loss may be considered by the
jury in assessing damages; and
(e) what circumstances are necessary to create a privilege.
(2)Subject to the control of the court, when the issue arises, the jury
determines whether,
(a) the statement complained of was understood by the recipient
as disparaging or otherwise injurious;
(b) the statement was understood to be published of and
concerning the plaintiff's interest;
(c) the statement was false;
(d) the circumstances were such as to make reliance on the
publication by a third person reasonably foreseeable;
(e) the publication caused pecuniary loss to the plaintiff, and if so,
its extent;
(f) the defendant had knowledge of the falsity of the statement or
acted in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity;
(g) the defendant published the matter from a motive of ill will
toward the plaintiff;
(h) the defendant intended to affect the plaintiff's interest;
(i) the circumstances necessary to create a privilege existed;
(j) facts existed that would constitute an abuse of a conditional
privilege.
第652條 法院與陪審團之功能
(1)於有侵害之虛偽不實訴訟，法院決定下
列事項：
(a) 陳述是否有足至毀謗或其他侵害之
意義；
(b) 原告受陳述影響之利益是否享有法
律保護；
(c) 原告損失是否足以支持該訴訟原因；
(d) 損失之特定項目是否得作為陪審團
評估賠償之考慮；
(e) 足以構成免責特殊權利之情況。
(2)於法院監督下，下列爭執發生時，陪審
團應加決定：
(a) 訴狀所提起之陳述是否為收受者了
解其為毀謗或其他侵害；
(b) 該陳述之是否被瞭解為將經公布而
與原告之利益有關；
(c) 陳述是否為虛偽不實；
(d) 其情況是否得合理預測第三人之信
賴該公布；
(e) 公布是否致原告受金錢損失？如為
肯定，其程度如何；
(f) 被告是否知悉陳述之虛偽不實，或被
告是否魯莽棄置陳述之為真實或虛
偽不顧而為之。
(g) 是否被告係以惡意對原告而作公布；
(h) 被告是否有影響原告利益之意圖；
(i) 形成免責特殊權利之情況是否存在；
(j) 是否有被告濫用附條件之免責特殊
權利之事實。
Division 6A. Privacy
Chapter 28A. Invasion Of Privacy
§ 652A. General Principle
(1)One who invades the right of privacy of another is subject to
liability for the resulting harm to the interests of the other.
(2)The right of privacy is invaded by
(a) unreasonable intrusion upon the seclusion of another, as stated
in § 652B; or
第六A篇 隱私權
第二十八章A章 隱私權之侵犯
第652A條 一般原則
(1)侵犯他人之隱私權者，就其因而受到之
利益傷害，應負責任。
(2)隱私權因下列情形之ㄧ而受侵犯：
(a) 不合理地侵入他人之隱密，如第
652B條之規定；或
(b) appropriation of the other's name or likeness, as stated in §
652C; or
(c) unreasonable publicity given to the other's private life, as
stated in § 652D; or
(d) publicity that unreasonably places the other in a false light
before the public, as stated in § 652E.
(b) 他人之姓名或肖像之竊用，如第
652C條之規定；或
(c) 不合理地公開他人之私生活，如第
652D條之規定；或
(d) 使他人有不實形象之公開，如第
652E條之規定。
§ 652B. Intrusion Upon Seclusion
One who intentionally intrudes, physically or otherwise, upon the
solitude or seclusion of another or his private affairs or concerns, is
subject to liability to the other for invasion of his privacy, if the
intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.
第652B條 隱密之侵入
故意以實體或其他方式，侵入他人之僻處或
獨居地點，或侵入其私人事項或私人關係，
如此種侵入於一般合理人之觀點，為高度之
侵入者，行為人應就其侵犯他人之隱私權負
責任。
§ 652C. Appropriation Of Name Or Likeness
One who appropriates to his own use or benefit the name or likeness
of another is subject to liability to the other for invasion of his
privacy.
第652C條 姓名或肖像之竊用
為自己使用或利益而竊用他人之姓名或名
稱者，應就侵犯其隱私權而負責任。
§ 652D. Publicity Given To Private Life
One who gives publicity to a matter concerning the private life of
another is subject to liability to the other for invasion of his privacy, if
the matter publicized is of a kind that
(a) would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and
(b) is not of legitimate concern to the public.
第652D條 私生活之公開
就下列方式之有關他人之私生活公開者，應
對他人之隱私權之侵犯負責任：
(a) 其事項之公開，依一般合理人之觀點，
為高度之侮辱；並且
(b) 其事項為社會大眾所毋須合法關懷者。
§ 652E. Publicity Placing Person In False Light
One who gives publicity to a matter concerning another that places the
other before the public in a false light is subject to liability to the other
for invasion of his privacy, if
(a) the false light in which the other was placed would be highly
offensive to a reasonable person, and
(b) the actor had knowledge of or acted in reckless disregard as to the
falsity of the publicized matter and the false light in which the
other would be placed.
第652E條 使人有不實形象之公開
就有關他人事項公開致他人於大眾之前有
不實形象，如於下列情形，應對侵犯該他人
之隱私權而負責任：
(a) 他人所受之不實形象，就一般合理人之
觀點，為高度侮辱。
(b) 行為人明知或魯莽棄置不顧公開事項之
虛偽不實致他人受之不實形象而行為。
§ 652F. Absolute Privileges
The rules on absolute privileges to publish defamatory matter stated in
§§ 583 to 592A apply to the publication of any matter that is an
invasion of privacy.
第652 F條 絕對免責之特殊權利
第583條至第592A條關於公布誹謗事項之
絕對免責之特殊權利之規定，於侵犯隱私權
之公開事項，亦有其適用。
§ 652G. Conditional Privileges
The rules on conditional privileges to publish defamatory matter
stated in §§ 594 to 598A, and on the special privileges stated in §§
611 and 612, apply to the publication of any matter that is an invasion
of privacy.
第652 G 條 附條件之免責特殊權利
第584條至第598A條關於公布誹謗事項之
免責特殊權利之規定，於侵犯隱私權之公開
事項，亦有其適用。
§ 652H. Damages
One who has established a cause of action for invasion of his privacy
is entitled to recover damages for
(a) the harm to his interest in privacy resulting from the invasion;
(b) his mental distress proved to have been suffered if it is of a kind
that normally results from such an invasion; and
(c) special damage of which the invasion is a legal cause.
第652 H 條 賠償
就其隱私權受侵犯而具備訴訟原因者，得請
求下列之賠償：
(a) 因侵犯而致其隱私利益之傷害；
(b) 為該種侵犯通常所致、且經證明之精神
痛苦；且
(c) 侵入為法律原因之特別損失。
§ 652I. Personal Character Of Right Of Privacy
Except for the appropriation of one's name or likeness, an action for
invasion of privacy can be maintained only by a living individual
whose privacy is invaded.
第652 I 條 隱私權之親自(個人)特性
除姓名或肖像竊用外，隱私權侵犯之訴訟，
僅得尤其隱私權受侵犯之人而仍生存時主
張。
Division 7. Unjustifiable Litigation
Chapter 29. Wrongful Prosecution Of Criminal
Proceedings (Malicious Prosecution)
Topic 1. General Principles
§ 653. Elements Of A Cause Of Action
A private person who initiates or procures the institution of criminal
proceedings against another who is not guilty of the offense charged is
subject to liability for malicious prosecution if
(a) he initiates or procures the proceedings without probable cause
and primarily for a purpose other than that of bringing an offender
to justice, and
(b) the proceedings have terminated in favor of the accused.
第七篇 無正當理由之訴訟
第二十九章 情勢訴訟程序之非法控訴
(各種控訴)
第一節 一般原則
第653條 訴因之要素
私人向公務員或組織控告，要求其對他人提
起訴訟，或誘使第三人向公務員或組織控
告，要求其對他人提起訴訟；或私人向公務
員或組織告發，而使他人受起訴，而該他人
就受控訴之犯罪，並無罪，如符合下列要
件，該私人應就惡意之訴訟負責任：
(a) 向公務員或組織控告或告發，無可能之
原因；其主要目的係為使嫌疑犯受司法
制裁以外之其他目的；並且
(b) 訴訟程序以終結而有利於被告。
§ 654. Institution Of Criminal Proceedings
(1)The term “criminal proceedings” includes any proceeding in
which a government seeks to prosecute a person for an offense and
to impose upon him a penalty of a criminal character.
(2)Criminal proceedings are instituted when
(a) process is issued for the purpose of bringing the person
第654條 刑事訴訟程序之開始
(1)「刑事訴訟程序」者，包括政府為追訴
犯罪者即使其受刑罰制裁之所有程序。
(2)刑事訴訟程序於下列情況為已開始：
(a) 傳票之簽發係為使犯罪嫌疑人送交
accused of a criminal offense before an official or tribunal
whose function is to determine whether he is guilty of the
offense charged, or whether he shall be held for later
determination of his guilt or innocence; or
(b) without the issuance of process an indictment is returned or an
information filed against him; or
(c) he is lawfully arrested on a criminal charge.
其功能為決定嫌疑犯是否有罪之公
務員或法院，或其功能為決定犯罪
嫌疑人應受拘押，以便其後由公務
員或法院決定其是否有罪；
(b) 未經簽發傳票，但其訴書經宣告，
或告發書經提起；
(c) 以刑法犯罪控訴罪名而經合法逮
捕。
§ 655. Continuing Criminal Proceedings
A private person who takes an active part in continuing or procuring
the continuation of criminal proceedings initiated by himself or by
another is subject to the same liability for malicious prosecution as if
he had then initiated the proceedings.
第655條 刑事訴訟程序之進行
私人就自己或第三人所開始之刑事訴訟程
序，積極參與或促成該訴訟程序之進行，應
有如開始該訴訟程序而負惡意訴訟之責任。
§ 656. Absolute Privilege Of Public Prosecutor
A public prosecutor acting in his official capacity is absolutely
privileged to initiate, institute, or continue criminal proceedings.
第656條 檢察官之絕對免責之特殊權利
檢察官本於其功能而作之倡議、提起、進行
刑事訴訟程序，有絕對免責之特殊權利。
§ 657. Plaintiff's Guilt As Bar To Recovery
The fact that the person against whom criminal proceedings are
instituted is guilty of the crime charged against him, is a complete
defense against liability for malicious prosecution.
第657條 原告有罪之不得請求賠償
受刑事追訴而經以被追訴之罪名，受有罪之
判決者，如提起惡意訴訟請求賠償，被告得
以其受有罪之判決為完全之抗辯。
Topic 2. Termination Of Proceedings
§ 658. General Rule
To subject a person to liability for malicious prosecution, the criminal
proceedings must have terminated in favor of the accused.
第二節 訴訟程序之終結
第658條 一般原則
使他人就惡意訴訟負責任者，原刑事訴訟程
序須為有利於被告而終結。
§ 659. Manner Of Termination
Criminal proceedings are terminated in favor of the accused by
(a) a discharge by a magistrate at a preliminary hearing, or
(b) the refusal of a grand jury to indict, or
(c) the formal abandonment of the proceedings by the public
prosecutor, or
(d) the quashing of an indictment or information, or
(e) an acquittal, or
(f) a final order in favor of the accused by a trial or appellate court.
第659條 訴訟程序終結之方式
刑事訴訟程序因下列方式之有利於被告而
終結：
(a) 治安法官於預備言詞辯論將其釋放；或
(b) 大陪審團拒絕對之作起訴；
(c) 檢察官之正式放棄訴訟程序；
(d) 取銷起訴或告發；或
(e) 無罪釋放；或
(f) 事實審法院或上訴法院之最後有利於被
告之命令。
§ 660. Indecisive Termination Of Proceedings 第660條 非決定性之訴訟程序之終結
A termination of criminal proceedings in favor of the accused other
than by acquittal is not a sufficient termination to meet the
requirements of a cause of action for malicious prosecution if
(a) the charge is withdrawn or the prosecution abandoned pursuant to
an agreement of compromise with the accused; or
(b) the charge is withdrawn or the prosecution abandoned because of
misconduct on the part of the accused or in his behalf for the
purpose of preventing proper trial; or
(c) the charge is withdrawn or the proceeding abandoned out of mercy
requested or accepted by the accused; or
(d) new proceedings for the same offense have been properly
instituted and have not been terminated in favor of the accused.
雖有利於被告但非並非宣告無罪之刑事訴
訟程序之終結，如於下列情況，不足符合惡
意訴訟之訴因，為不充分之終結：
(a) 因與被告(被控訴者)之談判協定而撤回
控訴或放棄控訴；或
(b) 因被告知不當行為或為避免不當訴訟審
理之被告利益，而撤回控訴或放棄訴
訟；或
(c) 本於寬恕而由被告請求或經被告接受，
而撤回控訴或放棄訴訟；或
(d) 同一犯罪之另一刑事訴訟程序已經被提
起，未作有利於被告之終結。
§ 661. Impossibility Of Bringing The Accused To Trial
The formal abandonment of proceedings by a public prosecutor is not
a sufficient termination in favor of the accused if the abandonment is
due to the impossibility or impracticability of bringing the accused to
trial.
第661條 不可能使嫌疑犯受審
檢察官之正式放棄訴訟程序係由於使嫌疑
犯受審理，乃不可能或不實際者，非有利於
被告(被控訴人)之充分終結。
Topic 3. Probable Cause
§ 662. Existence Of Probable Cause
One who initiates or continues criminal proceedings against another
has probable cause for doing so if he correctly or reasonably believes
(a) that the person whom he accuses has acted or failed to act in a
particular manner, and
(b) that those acts or omissions constitute the offense that he charges
against the accused, and
(c) that he is sufficiently informed as to the law and the facts to justify
him in initiating or continuing the prosecution.
第三節 可能原因
第662條 可能原因之存在
提起或進行刑事訴訟程序，如合於下列情
形，為有可能原因：
(a) 正確地或合理地相信受控訴者以一定方
式行為或怠於以一定方式行為；並且
(b) 正確地或合理地相信該做為或不作為構
成其所控訴之犯罪行為；並且
(c) 正確地或合理地相信其有關於法律、事
實之充分消息足以認為其提起或進行訴
訟係正當、合法。
§ 663. Effect Of Discharge Or Commitment By A
Magistrate
(1)In the absence of evidence of probable cause, a discharge of the
accused by a magistrate upon a preliminary hearing in the criminal
proceeding is conclusive of the lack of probable cause unless it
appears that the discharge was
(a) not upon the merits, or
(b) based upon testimony offered by the accused at the hearing, or
(c) due to the misconduct of the magistrate.
(2)The magistrate's commitment of the accused is evidence that the
person initiating the proceedings had probable cause.
第663條 治安法官之開釋或判決有罪命
令執行之效力
(1)治安法官因無可能原因之證據，於刑事
訴訟之預備言詞辯論，將被告開釋者，
應是為欠缺可能原因。但有下列情事
時，不在此限：
(a) 被告之開釋並非基於實質問題；或
(b) 被告之開釋，係本於被告於受審時所
提供之證據；或
(c) 被告之開釋，係由於治安法官之不當
行為。
(2)治安法官之將被告判決有罪、命令執
行，為提起訴訟之人有可能原因之證據。
§ 664. Effect Of The Action Of A Grand Jury
(1)In the absence of evidence of probable cause, the refusal of a
grand jury to indict the accused, if unexplained, is conclusive of
the lack of probable cause.
(2)The indictment of the accused by a grand jury is evidence that the
person who initiated the proceedings had probable cause for
initiating them.
第664條 大陪審團處置之效力
(1)無可能原因之證據，大陪審團之拒絕將
嫌疑犯起訴而未說明其原因者，是為欠
缺可能原因。
(2)大陪審團之將嫌疑犯起訴，為倡議訴訟
之人就其訴訟有可能原因之證據。
§ 665. Effect Of Abandonment Of Proceedings
(1)The termination of the proceedings in favor of the accused at the
instance of the private prosecutor who initiated them, or because
of his failure to press the prosecution, is evidence of a lack of
probable cause.
(2)The abandonment of criminal proceedings by a public prosecutor
acting on his own initiative after the prosecution has passed into
his control, is not evidence that the private prosecutor acted
without probable cause.
第665條 放棄訴訟程序之效力
(1)作有利於嫌疑犯之訴訟程序之終結，係
由於倡議之私訴訟人(告訴、告發者)之請
求或期待於促使控訴之進行者，為無可
能原因之證據。
(2)犯罪訴訟由檢察官處理並由其倡議，而
後放棄刑事訴訟程序者，並非私訴訟人
無可能原因之證據。
§ 666. Effect Of Advice Of Counsel
(1)The advice of an attorney at law admitted to practice and
practicing in the state in which the proceedings are brought, whom
the client has no reason to believe to have a personal interest in
obtaining a conviction, is conclusive of the existence of probable
cause for initiating criminal proceedings in reliance upon the
advice if it is
(a) sought in good faith, and
(b) given after a full disclosure of the facts within the accuser's
knowledge and information.
(2)The advice of an attorney admitted to practice in a state other than
that in which the proceedings are brought, given under the
conditions stated in Subsection (1), is conclusive of the existence
of probable cause if the client reasonably believes that the attorney
is competent to form a reliable opinion as to the law of the state in
which the proceedings are brought.
第666條 律師建議之效力
(1)控訴人信賴訴訟進行之州之合格准予執
行業務之律師之建議，無理由相信該律
師就判決被告有罪有其個人利益，而倡
議刑事訴訟程序者，於下列情形，視為
有可能原因：
(a) 控訴人本於善意而尋求建議；並且
(b) 控訴人本於其知識及消息，並將事實
完全公開而尋求建議。
(2)控訴人信賴訴訟進行之州以外之其他州
之合格准予執行業務之律師之建議，而
且符合前項之規定者，如控訴人合理地
相信該律師有能力就訴訟進行州之法律
作成可信賴之意見時，視為有可能原因
之存在。
§ 667. Effect Of Conviction Or Acquittal
(1)The conviction of the accused by a magistrate or trial court,
although reversed by an appellate tribunal, conclusively
establishes the existence of probable cause, unless the conviction
was obtained by fraud, perjury or other corrupt means.
(2)The acquittal of the accused by a magistrate or trial court is not
evidence of lack of probable cause.
第667條 被告受有罪或無罪判決之效力
(1)治安法官或事實審法院所做被告有罪判
決，雖經上級法院之駁斥，除非該有罪
判決係因詐欺、偽證或其他違法瀆職方
式而取得，視為有可能原因。
(2)治安法官或事實審法院之將被告無罪開
釋，並非無可能原因之證據。
Topic 4. Purpose 第四節 目的
§ 668. Propriety Of Purpose
To subject a person to liability for malicious prosecution, the
proceedings must have been initiated primarily for a purpose other
than that of bringing an offender to justice.
第668條 目的之適當性
使他人負惡意控訴責任者，該他人之倡議刑
事訴訟程序，其主要目的虛偽使犯罪者受法
律制裁以外之其他目的。
§ 669. Lack Of Probable Cause As Evidence Of An
Improper Purpose
Lack of probable cause for the initiation of criminal proceedings, in so
far as it tends to show that the accuser
did not believe in the guilt of
the accused, is evidence that he did not initiate the proceedings for a
proper purpose.
第669條 欠缺可能原因為不適當目的之
證據
倡議刑事訴訟程序無可能原因，就其顯示控
訴人不相信嫌疑犯有罪而言，為控訴人之倡
議訴訟程序並非為適當之目的之證據。
§ 669A. Improper Purpose Not Evidence Of Lack Of
Probable Cause
An improper purpose of the accuser in initiating or continuing the
proceeding is not evidence that he did not have probable cause to do
so.
第669A條 不適當目的並非欠缺可能原
因之證據
控訴人之倡議或進行訴訟之不適當目的，並
非控訴人無可能原因之證據。
Topic 5. Damages
§ 670. General Damages
When the essential elements of a cause of action for malicious
prosecution have been established, the plaintiff is entitled to recover
damages for
(a) the harm to his reputation resulting from the accusation brought
against him, and
(b) the emotional distress resulting from the bringing of the
proceedings.
第五節 賠償
第670條 一般賠償
惡意控訴之訴訟之主要訴訟原因(訴因)已具
備，原告有請求賠償下列損失之權：
(a) 向其提出控訴所致之名譽損害；以及
(b) 因刑事訴訟程序而致之精神痛苦。
§ 671. Special Damages
When the essential elements of a cause of action as for malicious
prosecution have been established, the plaintiff is entitled to recover
for
(a) the harm legally caused by any arrest or imprisonment suffered by
him during the course of the proceedings, and
(b) the expense that he has reasonably incurred in defending himself
from the accusation, and
(c) any specific pecuniary loss legally caused by the proceedings.
第671條 特別賠償
惡意控訴之訴訟之主要訴訟原因(訴因)已具
備，原告有請求賠償下列損失之權：
(a) 刑事訴訟程序中受逮捕或拘禁所致之損
害；以及
(b) 因控訴之辯護而合理所致之費用；以及
(c) 因訴訟程序而合法所致之任何特定金錢
損失。
Topic 6. Burden Of Proof And Function Of Court And Jury
§ 672. Burden Of Proof
第六節 舉證責任、法院與陪審團功能
第672條 舉證責任
(1)In an action for malicious prosecution, the plaintiff has the burden
of proving, when the issue is properly raised, that
(a) the defendant initiated or continued the criminal proceedings
against him;
(b) the proceedings were terminated in his favor;
(c) the defendant did not have probable cause for initiating or
continuing the proceedings;
(d) the primary purpose for which the proceedings were initiated
or continued was not to bring an offender to justice;
(e) the extent of the damages suffered by him;
(f) the conditions were such as to permit the recovery of punitive
damages.
(2)In an action for malicious prosecution, the defendant has the
burden of proving, when the issue is properly raised, that the
plaintiff was guilty of the crime charged against him.
(1)於惡意控訴之訴訟，如下列爭執被提出
時，原告負有舉證之責任：
(a) 被告倡議或進行控告原告之訴訟程
序；
(b) 訴訟程序有利於原告(原被控訴者)
而終結；
(c) 被告之倡議或進行控告原告，為無可
能原因；
(d) 被告之倡議或進行控告原告之主要
目的，並非使犯罪者受法律制裁；
(e) 原告所受損失之程度；
(f) 應准許原告請求懲罰性賠償之情況
(條件)
(2)於惡意控訴之訴訟，爭執被提出時，被
告就原告於受控訴之犯罪為有罪，附有
舉證責任。
§ 673. Function Of Court And Jury
(1)In an action for malicious prosecution the court determines
whether
(a) the proceedings of which the plaintiff complains were
criminal in character;
(b) the proceedings were terminated in favor of the plaintiff;
(c) the defendant had probable cause for initiating or continuing
the proceedings;
(d) the harm suffered by the plaintiff is a proper element for the
jury to consider in assessing damages.
(2)In an action for malicious prosecution, subject to the control of the
court, the jury determines
(a) the circumstances under which the proceedings were initiated
in so far as this determination may be necessary to enable the
court to determine whether the defendant had probable cause
for initiating or continuing the proceedings;
(b) whether the defendant acted primarily for a purpose other than
that of bringing an offender to justice;
(c) the circumstances under which the proceedings were
terminated;
(d) the amount that the plaintiff is entitled to recover as damages;
(e) whether punitive damages are to be awarded, and if so, their
amount.
第673條 法院與陪審團之功能
(1)於惡意控訴之訴訟，法院就下列事項有
決定權：
(a) 原告所主張之訴訟程序，是否為刑
事訴訟程序；
(b) 該刑事訴訟程序是否有利於原告而
終結；
(c) 被告之倡議或進行訴訟程序，是否
有可能原因；
(d) 原告所受之傷害，是否為陪審團於
評估損害賠償金額之適當要素。
(2)於惡意控訴之訴訟，在法院監督下，陪
審團就下列事項有決定權：
(a) 刑事訴訟程序之倡議之情況如何之
認定(但其認定係為使法院能決定
被告之倡議或進行該訴訟程序有可
能原因)；
(b) 被告之行為之目的，是否使犯罪者
受法律制裁以外之其他目的；
(c) 訴訟程序終結之客觀情況；
(d) 原告得情求賠償之金錢數額；
(e) 懲罰性賠償金額應否給予；如准
予，其數額。
Chapter 30. Wrongful Use Of Civil Proceedings
§ 674. General Principle
One who takes an active part in the initiation, continuation or
procurement of civil proceedings against another is subject to liability
to the other for wrongful civil proceedings if
第三十章 民事訴訟程序之非法利用
第674條 一般原則
就他人為被告之民事訴訟程序之倡議、進
行，積極參與或促使其倡議或進行，如符合
下列要件，應對該他人負非法利用民事訴訟
(a) he acts without probable cause, and primarily for a purpose other
than that of securing the proper adjudication of the claim in which
the proceedings are based, and
(b) except when they are ex parte, the proceedings have terminated in
favor of the person against whom they are brought.
程序之責：
(a) 無可能原因而行為；其目的為民事訴訟
程序之請求適當審理以外之其他目的，
且
(b) 除僅有一方當事人之訴訟外，訴訟程序
有利於被告而終結。
§ 675. Existence Of Probable Cause
One who takes an active part in the initiation, continuation or
procurement of civil proceedings against another has probable cause
for doing so if he reasonably believes in the existence of the facts
upon which the claim is based, and either
(a) correctly or reasonably believes that under those facts the claim
may be valid under the applicable law, or
(b) believes to this effect in reliance upon the advice of counsel,
sought in good faith and given after full disclosure of all relevant
facts within his knowledge and information.
第675條 可能原因之存在
就以他人為被告之民事訴訟程序之倡議、進
行，積極參與或促使其倡議或進行，如合理
相信其請求所據以成立之事實存在，且有下
列情形之一者，為有合理原因：
(a) 正確地或合理地相信本於該事實，依據
有關之法律，其請求有效，或
(b) 本於善意，並就其知識、消息之範疇內
將所有有關事實向律師陳述而經律師提
供建議；而依該建議相信，本於該事實
並依據有關之法律，其請求有效。
§ 676. Propriety Of Purpose
To subject a person to liability for wrongful civil proceedings, the
proceedings must have been initiated or continued primarily for a
purpose other than that of securing the proper adjudication of the
claim on which they are based.
第676條 目的之適當性
為使他人(行為人)就非法利用民事訴訟程序
而負責任，其訴訟程序之倡議或進行，主要
目的須係使其所請求得到適當審理以外之
目的。
§ 677. Civil Proceedings Causing An Arrest Or A
Deprivation Of Property
One who by taking an active part in the initiation, continuation or
procurement of civil proceedings against another causes him to be
arrested or deprived of the possession of his land or chattels or other
things is subject to liability to him for the harm done thereby if
(a) he acts without probable cause, and primarily for a purpose other
than that of securing the proper adjudication of the claim on which
the proceedings were based, and
(b) except when they are ex parte, the proceedings have terminated in
favor of the person against whom they are brought.
第677條 民事訴訟程序所致之逮捕或財
產之剝奪
就以他人為被告之民事訴訟程序之倡議、進
行，積極參與或促使其倡議或進行，而致他
人被逮捕或土地、動產或其他物之占有被剝
奪，如符合下列要件，應對該他人因之所受
之損害負責：
(a) 無可能原因而行為，其目的為民事訴訟
之請求適當審理以外之目的。
(b) 除僅有一方當事人之訴訟外，訴訟程序
有利於該他人(被告)而終結。
§ 678. Proceedings Alleging Insanity Or Insolvency
One who takes an active part in initiating against another civil
proceedings alleging the other's insanity or insolvency is subject to
liability caused thereby, if
(a) he acts without probable cause, and primarily for a purpose other
than that of securing the proper adjudication of the claim on which
the proceedings are based, and
第678條 牽涉精神喪失或破產之程序
以他人為被告之民事訴訟程序而主張他方
當事人精神喪失或破產者，就其因而所致之
傷害，如符合下列要件，應負責任：
(a) 無可能原因而行為，其目的為民事訴訟
之請求適當審理以外之目的，且
(b) except when they are ex parte, the proceedings have terminated in
favor of the person against whom they are brought.
(b) 除僅有一方當事人之訴訟外，訴訟程序
有利於該被告而終結。
§ 679. Repetition Of Civil Proceedings
One who repeatedly initiates civil proceedings against another for the
same cause of action is subject to liability for the harm caused
thereby, if
(a) the proceedings are initiated without probable cause, and primarily
for a purpose other than that of securing the proper adjudication of
the claim on which the proceedings are based, and
(b) except when they are ex parte, the proceedings have terminated in
favor of the person against whom they are brought.
第679條 民事訴訟程序之重複
基於同一訴訟原因而重複倡議民事訴訟程
序者，就其因而所致之傷害，如符合下列要
件，應負責任：
(a) 無可能原因而行為，其目的為民事訴訟
之請求適當審理以外之目的。
(b) 除僅有一方當事人之訴訟外，訴訟程序
有利於該被告而終結。
§ 680. Proceedings Before An Administrative Board
One who takes an active part in the initiation, continuation or
procurement of civil proceedings against another before an
administrative board that has power to take action adversely affecting
the legally protected interests of the other, is subject to liability for
any special harm caused thereby, if
(a) he acts without probable cause to believe that the charge or claim
on which the proceedings are based may be well founded, and
primarily for a purpose other than that of securing appropriate
action by the board, and
(b) except where they are ex parte, the proceedings have terminated in
favor of the person against whom they are brought.
第680條 行政機構之訴訟程序
向有權採取行動影響他人之法律保護利益
之行政機構，以他人為被告積極參與作民事
訴訟程序之倡議、進行，或促使其倡議或進
行，就其因而所致之傷害，如符合下列要
件，應負責任：
(a) 無可能原因而行為，其目的為民事訴訟
之請求適當審理以外之目的，且
(b) 除僅有一方當事人之訴訟外，訴訟程序
有利於該被告而終結。
§ 681. Damages
When the essential elements of a cause of action for wrongful civil
proceedings have been established, the plaintiff is entitled to recover
for
(a) the harm normally resulting from any arrest or imprisonment, or
any dispossession or interference with the advantageous use of his
land, chattels or other things, suffered by him during the course of
the proceedings, and
(b) the harm to his reputation by any defamatory matter alleged as the
basis of the proceedings, and
(c) the expense that he has reasonably incurred in defending himself
against the proceedings, and
(d) any specific pecuniary loss that has resulted from the proceedings,
and
(e) any emotional distress that is caused by the proceedings.
第681條 賠償
非法利用民事訴訟程序之訴訟之主要訴訟
原因(訴因)已具備，原告有以下請求賠償下
列損失之權：
(a) 於訴訟程序中，原告因逮捕、拘禁、剝
奪或干擾土地、動產或其他物占有而通
常所致之傷害；
(b) 作為訴訟程序基礎之誹謗情事而致其名
譽所受之損害；
(c) 因訴訟之辯護而合理所致之費用；
(d) 因訴訟程序而合法所致之任何特定金錢
損失；
(e) 因訴訟程序而致之任何精神痛苦。
§ 681A. Burden Of Proof
In an action for wrongful civil proceedings the plaintiff has the burden
of proving, when the issue is properly raised, that
第681A條 舉證責任
於非法利用民事訴訟程序之訴訟，如下列爭
執被提出時，原告負有舉證責任：
(a) the defendant has initiated, continued or procured the civil
proceedings against him;
(b) the proceedings were terminated in his favor;
(c) the defendant did not have probable cause for his action;
(d) the primary purpose for which the proceedings were brought was
not that of securing the proper adjudication of the claim on which
the proceedings were based;
(e) he suffered special harm, and the extent of the harm;
(f) the circumstances make the recovery of punitive damages
appropriate.
(a) 被告倡議、進行，或促進倡議、進行，
控告原告之民事訴訟程序；
(b) 訴訟程序有利於原告(指原訴訟程序之
被告)而終結；
(c) 被告之行為無可能原因；
(d) 被告之提起民事訴訟程序之主要目的，
為民事訴訟之請求適當審理以外之目
的；
(e) 原告受到特別傷害，及該傷害之程度；
(f) 應准許原告請求懲罰性賠償之情況。
§ 681B. Functions Of Court And Jury
(1)In an action for wrongful civil proceedings, the court determines
whether
(a) a civil proceeding has been initiated;
(b) the proceeding was terminated in favor of the plaintiff;
(c) the defendant had probable cause for his action;
(d) the harm suffered by the plaintiff is a proper element for the
jury to consider in assessing damages.
(2)In an action for wrongful civil proceedings, subject to the control
of the court, the jury determines
(a) the circumstances under which the proceedings were initiated
in so far as may be necessary to enable the court to determine
whether the defendant had probable cause for initiating them;
(b) whether the defendant acted primarily for a purpose other than
that of securing the proper adjudication of the claim on which
the proceeding was based;
(c) the circumstances under which the proceedings were
terminated;
(d) the amount that the plaintiff is entitled to recover as general
and special damages;
(e) whether punitive damages are to be awarded, and if so, in what
amount.
第681B條 法院與陪審團之功能
(1)於非法利用民事訴訟程序之訴訟，法院
就下列事項有決定權：
(a) 民事訴訟程序是否經倡議、提起；
(b) 訴訟程序是否有利於原告而終結；
(c) 被告之行為是否有可能原因；
(d) 原告所受之傷害，是否為陪審團於評
估損害賠償金額之適當要素。
(2)於非法利用民事訴訟程序之訴訟，在法
院監督下，陪審團就下列事項有決定
權： 。
(a) 民事訴訟程序之倡議之情況如何之
認定(但其認定係為使法院能決定被
告之倡議或進行該訴訟程序有可能
原因)；
(b) 被告之提起民事訴訟程序之主要目
的，是否為民事訴訟之請求適當審理
以外之其他目的；
(c) 訴訟程序終結之客觀情況；
(d) 原告得請求之一般賠償及特別賠償
之金錢數額；
(e) 懲罰性賠償應否給予，如准予，其數
額。
留言列表
神學一 (3)