近年來，金融科技（FinTech）的浪潮推動銀行業由傳統「實體通路」加速轉向以網路平台為核心的「數位金融服務」模式。此一轉型雖大幅優化了服務效率，卻也使內部控制機制與舞弊風險態樣產生了結構性位移。本研究旨在探討數位金融發展對銀行員舞弊風險前因與感知之影響，並聚焦於傳統「舞弊鑽石理論」於數位場景下之適用性與實務質變。 本研究採取「主客觀雙軌實證與方法論三角檢證（Methodological Triangulation）」：主觀認知面透過問卷調查法蒐集我國現職銀行從業人員之實證數據，運用多元迴歸模型進行假說檢證；客觀事實面則採用內容分析法（Content Analysis）進行層次編碼，並建構次級資料多元線性迴歸模型，深度剖析我國金融監督管理委員會（金管會）自民國 99 年至 114 年間、長達 16 年縱向時間軸上共 936 件之銀行業處分公告與裁罰嚴重度之決定因素。 研究結果顯示： 第一， 引發銀行員舞弊風險感知最本質的驅動力，高度取決於客觀環境上是否存在內控疏漏之「舞弊機會（OP）」（β = 0.5184， p < 0.001）及主觀之「行為合理化心態（RA）」（β = 0.4143， p < 0.001），此與客觀裁罰中「一般程序缺失」常年高居主導地位（68.91%）之事實相互呼應。同時，客觀裁罰模型實證內部控制失效（D_INTERNAL）與合規缺失（D_KYC、D_AML）對實質裁罰嚴重度具高度顯著之正向衝擊。 第二， 實證揭示了我國銀行業正面臨顯著之「主客觀認知落差」與「風險認知鈍化」現象：行員主觀上並不認為數位金融發展會直接提高舞弊風險，然而客觀裁罰歷史數據卻顯示純數位型與涉及複合通路之「混合型舞弊」於中後期呈現結構性攀升。 第三， 規避內部控制之「能力（CA）」風險並未消失，而是因應線上環境發生了高隱匿性之「分流質變」。 第四， 混合型舞弊之本質，在實務上依然高度依賴傳統的人際操守破口（如客戶之過度信任或主管覆核之流於形式）。 基於上述實證發現，本研究結合自行查核與分行作業主管之實務視角，提出具體之風險治理對策。金融機構應揚棄傳統流於形式之無差別線上審查，全面導入系統技術端之「硬控制（Hard Control）」，包括建構交易行為特徵之「動態風險覆核系統」並輔以主管生物辨識核驗，且由系統端直接阻斷行員代辦輸入。期能以強制性之技術約束手段彌補從業人員之風險認知鈍化、全面阻斷舞弊機會，建構具備數位韌性之金融風險治理體制。;In recent years， the wave of financial technology （FinTech）has accelerated the transformation of the banking industry from traditional physical channels to online platform-based "digital financial services." Although this transformation significantly optimizes operational efficiency， it also triggers a structural shift in internal control mechanisms and fraud risk patterns. This study aims to explore the impact of digital finance development on bank employees′ fraud risk antecedents and perceptions， focusing on the applicability and qualitative evolution of the traditional "Fraud Diamond Theory" in digital banking contexts. This study adopts a dual-track empirical approach utilizing methodological triangulation. For the subjective perception dimension， data was collected via a questionnaire survey of current banking practitioners in Taiwan and analyzed using a multiple regression model. For the objective reality dimension， content analysis was employed to systematically code and classify 936 administrative penalty notices issued by the Financial Supervisory Commission （FSC） against the banking sector over a 16-year longitudinal period from 2010 to 2025， and a secondary multiple linear regression model was constructed to evaluate the critical determinants of regulatory penalty severity. The empirical results indicate that: First， the fundamental driving force of bank employees′ fraud risk perception depends heavily on the presence of internal control loopholes （"Fraud Opportunity"， OP， β = 0.5184， p < 0.001） and the psychological defense of "Behavioral Rationalization" （RA， β = 0.4143， p < 0.01）. This finding is consistent with the objective fact that "general procedural deficiencies" consistently dominate administrative penalties， accounting for 68.91%. Concurrently， the secondary regression model confirms that internal control failures （D_INTERNAL） and compliance deficiencies （D_KYC and D_AML） exert highly significant positive marginal impacts on actual penalty severity. Second， a significant "subjective-objective cognitive gap" and a phenomenon of "risk perception blunting" are revealed: while employees subjectively believe that digital finance development does not directly increase fraud risk， objective penalty data shows a structural surge in pure digital and hybrid fraud cases in the mid-to-late stages. Third， the risk associated with employees′ "capability" （CA） to bypass controls has not vanished but has undergone a qualitative shift into high-concealment digital methods. Fourth， hybrid fraud fundamentally relies on traditional integrity breaches in practice， such as clients′ over-trust or supervisors′ rubber-stamping. Based on these empirical findings and a practical perspective of branch operations management， this study proposes actionable countermeasures. Financial institutions should abandon traditional， undifferentiated online reviews and fully implement system-level "Hard Controls." This includes constructing a "Dynamic Risk Review System" driven by transaction behavior characteristics and supported by supervisor biometric verification for supervisors， as well as systematically blocking employees from entering digital settings on behalf of clients. Such technical constraints can help mitigate employees′ risk perception blunting， eliminate fraud opportunities， and build a risk governance framework with digital resilience.
