English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 95905/126495 (76%)
Visitors : 31772564      Online Users : 428
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 商學院 > 金融學系 > 期刊論文 >  Item 140.119/64856
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/64856


    Title: 違約的代價: 契約違約金存在之合理性
    Other Titles: The Price of Breaching the Contract: The Rationality of Penalty
    Authors: 黃俊源;郭照榮;江彌修
    Huang,Chun-Yuan;Kuo,Chau-Jung;Chiang,Mi-Hsiu
    Contributors: 金融系
    Keywords: 最適違約金;選擇權評價;契約違約
    optimum penalty;option pricing;breach of contract
    Date: 2008-01
    Issue Date: 2014-03-24 14:07:31 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 買賣或服務契約常因任一方違約而造成契約失效,同時違約方必須付出一筆違約金額以賠償被違約方之損失,然而違約金之收取比例適當與否卻常是買賣雙方在解除契約後最易引起糾紛之處。買賣雙方會依其情況選擇是否違約,因此本文利用簡單的選擇權模型予於評價此部分的價值。經由模型之推導,我們求得契約雙方都擁有選擇權下的預期現金流量折現值,同時得到了令買賣雙方在簽約時點有合理公平交易地位之最適違約金比例。最後我們利用敏感性分析證明了契約買方通常是處於較為劣勢之一方,據此本文認為應對契約賣方之違約金比例應有較嚴格之規定以保護買方在交易之際所簽訂之違約金是否適宜,進而達到公平交易之目的。
    A contract becomes invalid whenever the contracting parties are in breach of it, at which point one of them has to compensate the other for damages. However, disputes frequently arise when both contracting parties break the contract, especially when inappropriate penaltie1s are involved. We consider that contracting parties have the right to break a contract due to cost considerations, so that they will often consider whether or not it is beneficial to them to break the contract. Here we develop a simple options pricing model to examine the rationality of imposing penalties and the factors that have an effect on this. In terms of pricing, we determine the discounted cash flows of the contracting parties when both of them own options. We also suggest that it is important to set a fair penalty when signing a contract, while we also use sensitivity analysis to prove that the consumers usually belong to the disadvantaged minority. In other words, from the viewpoint of the Fair Trade Law, the standards for setting the seller’s share of the penalty should be more strict.
    Relation: 公平交易季刊, 16(1), 35-55
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[金融學系] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    3555.pdf1251KbAdobe PDF759View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback