[[alternative]]期後事項之法律責任

[[abstract]]投資人經常使用經會計師查核之財務報表，若有發生財務報導不實之情形時，最常轉向會計師索討，是否會計師就應當要承擔如此龐大的法律責任？本篇研究基於管理階層與會計師之間所存在的委任契約關係，針對期後事項本質的特殊性，說明會計師在審計委任中所扮演的角色，以判定現行法令對於會計師處分的適切性。藉此希望能減輕會計師一定程度的法律責任，讓投資人能明瞭查核工作所面臨的先天限制，使已善盡專業注意的會計師能免於受到不當的法律責任。研究結果認為期後事項的發生早以超越雙方委任契約的查核範圍，而會計上存有的深口袋理論，以經濟能力程度作為承擔賠償責任的指標。故筆者認為，反對深口袋理論的適用是有助於審計品質的提升，吸引更多優秀審計人材進入查核團隊，提升查核品質。 While making the investment decision, investors usually rely on the financial statements audited by the CPA to have further understanding about the target company. Therefore, when investors suffer from the loss resulted from the mis-presentation of the financial statements, they will tend to look for the compensation from the CPA, especially with the company’s being financially broken. However, this research has different opinion from the above-stated practice, the so-called Deep-Pocket Theory. Confronted with the inherent limitations of audition, it’s impracticable to require the CPA to exam every details to guarantee the financial statements’ being precisely correct and nothing false, and hence, it seems unfair to have the CPA in the position as the last loss bearer whenever something goes wrong. This research, by reviewing the contract, the regulation and the law binding the CPA and the corporations, tries to build on a different loss allocation principle for the liabilities resulted from the subsequent events. Hopefully, with the loss allocation theory this research come out, may we mitigate the liabilities CPA suffer from subsequent events now