本研究從具體廣告内容出發，以MILD SEVEN TIMES與 DAVIDOFF COFFEE二支電視廣告為例，探討其是否與現行菸害防制 法第九條第一項規定相悖。研究結果顯示，MILD SEVEN手錶與 DAVIDOFF咖啡電視廣告内容與本身菸品品牌具有高度關聯性；同 時，歷年來所花費之廣告成本與廣告商品（手錶、咖啡）進口數量相較 下，非但無利可圊，虧本額度之大，極不符合常理，而今上述廣告仍以 巨額成本在電視上大作廣告。 本研究提出此類以延伸性產品作為規避相關法律規定之廣告，表面 上雖未違法，然與法學上「脫法行為」法理相似一亦即菸商以此等手法 運用廣電媒體以規避菸害防制法所規範之廣告内容。最後，本研究回歸 法律層面探討，並提出解決此問題之可行方案。

This research investigates the advertisements of derivative products to see whether they violate the present law regulating tobacco products. According to Article 9 I (1) of Tobacco Hazards Control Law, it is forbidden to advertise tobacco products on TV and radio. However, tobacco producers use derivative products to promote cigarette on TV and radio. Two obvious examples are the advertisements of MILD SEVEN TIMES and DAVIDOFF COFFEE. This research finds that the MILD SEVEN TIMES advertisement lacks balance between its price and the costs of advertisement. The other advertisement DAVIDOFF COFFEE shares the same result. This research also finds that two advertisements belong to the so-called “evasive advertisements”. In other words，it is an evasive act aiming at evading the Tobacco Hazards Control Law. This research also discusses the ways to deal with these evasive advertisements.