本文從 2016 年最高行政法院一則關於社會救助法上低收入戶認 定的判決出發，參考德國社會行政法之規定及相關學說實務見解，探討 社會行政程序中當事人協力義務之形成、類型、範圍、界限及違反所生 之效果，並以社會救助實務中常見之資料提出及接受家庭訪視兩種協力 義務類型為例，分析其於德國法上曾經出現的爭議問題。資料提出義務 部分將以申請人三個月內銀行帳戶異動資料為例，分析其在社會行政程 序協力義務架構中的定位及資料保護法上之相關疑義；家庭訪視部分將 聚焦於違反之法律效果為說明，具體而言將涉及社會行政訴訟上當事人 間客觀舉證責任之分配。本文希望藉由德國社會行政程序法相關學理之 分析討論，提供我國行政法院未來在相關問題上更進一步論證之依據， 並希冀其更具備當事人生存權保障之敏感意識。

This Article begins with a decision regarding the identification process of Low-income households in Social Assistance Act, which was made by the Supreme Administrative Court in 2016. Related discussions in German social administrative Law are taken as reference, so as to clearly define the foundation, types, scopes and limitation of obligation of co-operation in social administrative process. The article focuses on two important investigation methods in the practices of Social Assistance - Submission of data information and home investigation, then analyses related issues in Germany legal discussions. In Germany, the submission of applicant’s nearest bank account information within three months has triggered many concerns both under the frame of obligation of co-operation und data protection law. Discussion about home investigation emphasizes on the result of its violation, which also relates to the objective burden of proof between the parties in social administrative proceeding. This article bases on the theories and practices in German social administrative law in order to bring more inspirations for further cases of the Administrative Court so that the social protection rights of the applicants could be more appropriately realized.