林華德因其配偶葉素菲淘空博達公司之不當資金往來案，經金管會認定有不誠 信行為決議林華德擔任國票金控公司、國際票券公司之董事職務當然解任，林華德 不服金管會上開決議除提起行政訴訟救濟外，另以其早已向國際票券公司、國際票 券公司職工福利委員會為退休之意思表示，分別對國際票券公司、國際票券公司職 工福利委員會起訴請求給付退休金、福利金之民事通常訴訟、民事簡易訴訟，上開 三種訴訟結果就金管會所為解任林華德國票金控公司及國際票券公司董事職務之決 議是否屬於行政處分，以及於何時發生解任之效果，有截然不同見解。本文除介紹 林華德案之始末，明確性原則之意義、適用、違反效果，再探討不確定法律概念不 得適用於當然解任規定，否則違反法明確性原則，並兼評論上開訴訟程序之各判 決，以作為金管會、財政部訂定相關辦法及法院實務辦案之參考。

Lin Hua-De shall certainly be discharged from the office of director of Waterland Financial Holdings and Internation Bill Finance Corporation by the cosulution of Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) because he has movements of capital with his wife Ye Su-Fei, that embezzles empty out of the PROCOMP Informatics LTD. Lin Hua-De against the resulution of FSC , in addition to file administrative proceedings remedies,he makes a intent to retire from Waterland Financial Holdings and Internation Bill Finance Corporation Welfare Committee, he also initiates two civil actions to demand the retirement pension and welfare fund of civil ordinary proceeding,civil summary proceedings. There are three different views on the outcome of the proceeding on administrative disposition and when the dismissal effected. This article introduces the whole story Lin hua-De case, the principle of clarity definiteness,and the effect of violation. Then along with the concept of indefinite concept of law shall not apply to the dismissal, otherwise the principle of clarity and definiteness violation of law. In the conclusion, this article also provides comments on the decision of the proceedings, as a reference for the FSC, Ministry of Finance, a related approach and court practice in handling cases.