連坐是個源自中國秦、漢以前的古老概念，雖不為多數現代法治國家所認同；但卻自始即存在於我國交通違規處罰之中，常被大家所輕忽。尤其相關學術研究對於其理論的建構闕如，更使得該類交通處罰在立法上與執行上，經常出現恣意與隨興。本研究首先自行政罰理論上建構連坐責任的法理基礎，繼而確立連坐責任的本質、特性與適用條件，然後針對現行道路交通管理處罰條例中所存在的連坐處罰內容與條文進行檢討。研究結果發現，於現行處罰條例中，運用連坐型態責任的條文共計有18條，占全體條文15%左右，比例頗高；但由於欠缺對連坐責任的探討與認識，許多條文結構顯得模糊混亂，內容矛盾衝突者更所在多有。本研究均將在所建構的理論基礎上，一一檢討指出並提出建議，除供未來學術之繼續討論外，亦供立法政策與實務作業之參考。

Collateral penalty, an old disciplinary concept, has been introduced before the Qinand Han Dynasties in China. Although it is not well adopted nowadays in most moderncountries, collateral penalty has existed in the punishments to traffic violators since the traffic laws went into effect in Taiwan. Partly due to few studies on this topic, there is full of willfulness and arbitrariness in traffic legislations and law enforcement. In this paper, the cause of responsibility of collateral penalty based on the theory of administrative sanction is first discussed. Defining the essence, characteristics, and suitable situations for collateral penalty, this study reviews and examines the current provisions of collateral penalty in the Act Governing the Punishment of Violation of Road Traffic Regulations. About 15% of the provisions, 18 articles, were found to be related to collateral penalty. A significant proportion of them is ambiguous and conflicting. This study identifies and explores these problems and gives normative suggestions to legislation and enforcement against collateral penalty.