本文透過我國貿易救濟與行政救濟案例的分析將所衍生之產業損害認定行為之性質與司法審查之密度等爭點態樣類型化，並分從實務及學說對是類事實及法律上之見解為論述，同時參酌國外案例與救濟實務作一比較法之剖析。我國加入WTO後，貿易救濟案件日益增多，相關行政救濟案件亦附隨而增，蓋任何進口救濟措施之採行或反傾銷稅之課徵，雖使國內產業受益，但亦造成出口國產業及進口商蒙受不利影響，從而誘生訟源，復因貿易救濟案件及所衍生之行政救濟案件均屬具高度專業知識的領域，除個案受損之調查，牽涉範圍廣泛，於訴訟上更涉及參與訴訟之當事人及利害關係人、對於不確定法律概念之判斷餘地、產業損害認定行為之性質、當事人之資格與協力義務之界限容有諸多爭議，同時由於WTO爭端解決機制不適用「當地救濟用盡」(exhaustion of local remedy)原則，因此對於貿易救濟措施採行決定，不僅行政法院有權依法審判，爭端解決小組及其上訴機構亦有權針對法律之適用及事實之認定作成建議或裁決，從而由於審判權競合而衍生裁判扞格、爭端解決報告定位爭議。冀籍由本文撰述以為行政法院審理案件及調查機關健全我國貿易救濟機制之參考。

This paper attempts to analyze the establishment of industry injury behavior, derived from Taiwan's trade relief and administrative remedy cases, and its qualities and judicial review scope. Comparisons were made against similar foreign cases in an attempt to find the practical and theoretical effects in a legal and factual perspective. The number of Taiwan's safeguards cases increases everyday upon the accession into the WTO, resulting in an increase in the administrative remedy cases. Although the establishment of import relief measure and antidumping duty will benefit most domestic industries, it creates welfare loss toward export based industries and import firms. Trade remedy and its extension as administrative remedy are regarded as highly technically based knowledge; therefore it requires more than individual case study. We examine the interest parties involved in the lawsuit and their conceptual knowledge regarding the case and its benefits affects the dispute. For the reason that the WTO dispute settlement body doesn't apply to the principle of "Exhaustion of Local Remedy", therefore the decision reached by the trade remedy measure is not only rightfully tried by the administrative court, but legal consultation is allowed by the dispute settlement unit and the appeal team. This results in a conflict of interest by both sides. The fairness of the dispute settlement report is also questioned. This study is conducted for the benefit of trials in administrative court and the investigation unit as reference.