隨著國際永續準則（IFRS S1/S2）與金管會 ESG 評鑑之推行，非財務資訊的揭露已從道德倡議的「軟法」，逐步邁入牽動《公司法》與《證券交易法》民刑事受託義務與法律責任認定之「硬法」過渡期。在此脈絡下，永續報告書若涉有可能衍生之潛在永續資訊揭露不實（漂綠）風險，縱使目前尚非法定財務業務文件，惟若與有價證券之募集、發行、私募及買賣有關者，仍不排除有觸發《證券交易法》第 20 條第 1 項證券詐欺責任之虞；同時，依據美國德拉瓦州法院 Caremark 案與 Marchand 案之法理，董事會若對氣候變遷、資訊安全或供應鏈人權等攸關企業營運之重大風險事項，未建置適當之資訊通報機制，可能將面臨潛在之監督失靈法律責任風險。 本研究以具備「高耗能、高耗水、高污染」特性之半導體矽晶圓製造業為研究對象。首先，結合 COSO 內部控制框架、ESG 評鑑指標與監督法理，建構出涵蓋「董事會實質治理與程序審慎、永續資訊可靠度與法定標準遵循、氣候相關風險財務化與績效薪酬結合機制、誠信經營與異常警訊通報機制、營運持續、永續人力資源與價值鏈韌性」之「永續治理五大評估構面」。其次，透過此客觀標準對台灣五大晶圓製造企業進行實證比較，具體析述出個案 A 公司目前正面臨「形式法遵合格，實質監督不足」之深層治理落差與潛在法律風險。 為彌平法理與實務之斷層，本研究進一步將宏觀之監督義務具體轉化為微觀之管理實踐。透過對 A 公司之九大營運循環與內部稽核制度進行全盤重構，適度導入「內部碳定價」、「非財務數據資訊系統自動化控制」、「實質獨立之異常警訊通報機制」、「績效與薪酬結合機制」，妥善留存已踐行「程序審慎」與具備「善意信賴」之客觀紀錄，進而藉此向司法機關說明其已盡善良管理人之注意義務，並或有助於作為日後主張適用商業判斷法則時之客觀佐證。 最後，本研究探討企業自律機制之先天侷限，將視角拉高至國家總體法制層次。針對現行規範之闕漏，建議宜落實「法律保留原則」以確立永續報告書之法源依據；同時，在課予法律責任之際，宜評估參考美國法制同步配套增訂「前瞻性永續聲明之安全港（Safe Harbor）條款」，以期避免過度限縮董事會之商業決策裁量空間，協助台灣半導體晶圓製造產業在國際供應鏈法規日益嚴格之趨勢中，建構兼具永續韌性與法規遵循之風險管控機制。;With the implementation of the International Sustainability Standards (IFRS S1/S2) and the ESG evaluation by the Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC)， the disclosure of non-financial information is transitioning from a "soft law" of moral advocacy to a "hard law" phase that affects the determination of civil and criminal fiduciary duties and legal liabilities under the Company Act and the Securities and Exchange Act. In this context， if a sustainability report involves a potential risk of misrepresentation in sustainability information (greenwashing)， even though it is not yet a statutory financial and business document， it may still trigger securities fraud liability under Article 20， Paragraph 1 of the Securities and Exchange Act if it is related to the public offering， issuance， private placement， or trading of securities. Meanwhile， based on the jurisprudence of the Caremark and Marchand cases in the Delaware courts of the United States， if the board of directors fails to establish an appropriate information reporting mechanism for mission-critical risk issues vital to the company′s operations—such as climate change， information security， or supply chain human rights—it may face a potential legal liability risk for oversight failure. This study focuses on the semiconductor silicon wafer manufacturing industry， which is characterized by "high energy consumption， high water consumption， and high pollution." First， integrating the COSO internal control framework， ESG evaluation indicators， and oversight jurisprudence， this study constructs the "Five Dimensions of Sustainable Governance Assessment." These dimensions encompass: "substantive board governance and objective evidence of the decision-making process (procedural diligence)，" "reliability， compliance， and systematic automated control of sustainability information，" "financialization of climate risk and performance-remuneration linkage mechanism，" "integrity management and abnormal warning (red flag) reporting mechanism，" and "business continuity， sustainable human resources， and value chain resilience." Next， through this objective standard， an empirical comparison of Taiwan′s top five wafer manufacturing companies is conducted. It specifically highlights that Company A currently faces a deep governance gap of "formal compliance but insufficient substantive oversight" and potential legal risks. To bridge the gap between jurisprudence and practice， this study further translates the macro-level duty of oversight into micro-level management practices. By comprehensively restructuring Company A′s nine operational cycles and internal audit systems， this study suggests moderately introducing internal control procedures such as "Internal Carbon Pricing (ICP)，" "systematic automated control of non-financial data，" a "substantially independent abnormal warning reporting mechanism，" and a "performance and remuneration linkage mechanism." The goal is to properly retain objective records demonstrating the fulfillment of "procedural diligence" and "good faith reliance." This allows the board to explain to the judiciary that it has fulfilled its duty of care as a good administrator， which may also help serve as objective evidence when asserting the application of the Business Judgment Rule (BJR) in the future. Finally， this study acknowledges the inherent limitations of corporate self-regulation mechanisms and elevates the perspective to the national legal system level. In response to the deficiencies of current regulations， it recommends implementing the "Principle of Legal Reservation" to establish the legal basis for sustainability reports. At the same time， when imposing legal liabilities， it advises evaluating and referencing the U.S. legal system to concurrently enact a "Safe Harbor" provision for forward-looking sustainability statements. This aims to avoid overly restricting the board′s discretionary space for business judgments and to assist Taiwan′s semiconductor wafer manufacturing industry in constructing a risk management mechanism that balances sustainable resilience and legal compliance amid the increasingly stringent trends of international supply chain regulations.
