| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立高雄大學 === 法律學系碩士班 === 104 === Exection of the compulsory monetary payment in public law has been changed only by the branches of the Administrative Enforcement Agency were responsible for execution, that according to the Administrative Execution Act and Compulsory Enforcement Act to take the charge of the affairs rather than being restricted, after the Administrative Execution Act came into effect from January 1, 2001. The duty in the monetary payment of public law whether it does be realized, that will be consummated a matter of national finance, social, public facilities, public health and welfare or not. Administrative enforcement is extremely higher of public welfare than civil enforcement.
Just before the branches of the Administrative Enforcement Agency launched procedure for execution , they should first review the legality of a ground for execution. However, the administrative executive organ of the legality of a ground for execution only can be in the form of review to be substantially unable to review. But I have found themselves in the practical work most kinds of a ground for execution is the administrative sanction. In chapter two, I attempt introduce all the validities of the administrative sanction that have been depicted in text books and articles. In the third chapter, I tried to explain the administrative executive organ only can be in the form of review is based on what, then the discussion on the effect of administrative execution and the administrative remedy.
Finally, this paper argues that, if the administrative executive organ for the substantive review of a ground for execution, that make it practically difficult to perform. And if the national debt is no way to quickly obtain reimbursement will greatly damage the public interest. Not to mention for the obligor, when he received the original administrative sanction is obtained rights to exercise administrative remedy. Therefore, we should not pay attention to revitalize the for the obligor to enjoy the 2nd of administrative remedy opportunities during the administrative execution phase. So finally no way to get the definitive conclusion that the administrative executive organ should be changed into a substantive review of a ground for execution.
|
|---|
