企業集團内部資金調度在法律上應屬贷款性質，除了應受公司法第15條 有關公司贷款限制的規範外，子公司資金挹注母公司的行為（上行贷款）可能 涉及同法第369條之4有關控制公司控制力行使責任的規範，而母公司資金挹 注子公司（下行贷款）則可能涉及第369條之7有關衡平居次法則的規範，而 學說上對於本條第2項之要件以及法律效果，仍頗有爭議，依本條立法說明所載，此規定係繼受自美國法上之「深石原則」，因此，從比較法的觀點探討美 國法上的相關規範，應有助於釐清此項規定的適用；惟分析美國相關判決所採 之見解，關係企業之下行贷款是否適用深石原則，無論是必要要件「不正行 為」，或法律結果範圍之「債權人所受之損害」，在事實認定上都不易確定，且對於如何規範子公司已清償母公司之贷款債權，亦欠缺明確的探討，是以即 使採取美國法上的觀念，對於我國法上相關規定如何適用於下行贷款，亦尚有部分疑義有待釐清。相對於此，德國法上對此採所謂的「完全居次」制度，不 僅要件與法律效果明確，對已清償之債權也有明確的規定，且與母公司行使控 制力促使子公司為不利益經營的規定，亦有清楚的區分，此或可作為我國未來修法之參考。

The nature of the inter-company financing facility within the affiliated enterprises shall be regarded as a "loan" and therefore regulated by Article 15 of the Corporation Law. Furthermore, the money lent by a subsidiary company to its controlling company ("Upstream Loan") shall be regulated by Article 369-4 of the Corporation Law which provides the liabilities of a controlling company unduly exercising the controlling power to its subsidiary company. In contrast, under the circumstance that a loan made by a controlling company to its subsidiary company ("Downstream Loan"), Article 369-7 of the Corporation Law, which provides the Doctrine of Equitable Subordination, in accordance with the legislative explanation, following from the "Deep Rock Doctrine" under the American Corporation Law, shall be applied. However the requirements as well as its related legal effect of this Article are quite controversial so far. Thus, from comparative law aspect, the discussions on the related view under the American Corporation Law might be helpful to clarify the application of this Article. However, after analyzing the Deep Rock Doctrine related cases of American, it is hard to adopt the view under the American Law to resolve the Downstream Loan cases. This is not only because of the difficulty in Downstream Loan cases to meet the requirements of "misconduct" and "injury of the other creditors" set under the Deep Rock Doctrine under the American Law, but also American Law's lack of specific discussions in the circumstance when a subsidiary company has repaid its controlling company the Downstream Loan. Therefore, even though we adopt the view under the American Law, how to apply Article 369-7 of the Corporation Law to the Downstream Loan cases should still need to be further clarified. However, Germany Law at this respect adopts so-called "Ffull subordination Rule", which not only clearly defines the requirements and legal effect regarding Downstream Loan cases, but also regulates the situation of which the Downstream Loans has been repaid. In other words, it stipulates the liability of the controlling company which unduly exercises its controlling power to its subsidiary company in the Corporation Code (Aktiengesetz) on one side, and regulates the situation of the Downstream Loans in the Insolvency Code on the other side. As such, there is no confusion between these two conceptions. In conclusion, the approach taken by Germany Law could be a reference for our future law amendment.