訴願與訴訟程序最大之差異在於，訴願及其前置程序本身為行政一體概念下，由機關針對原處分所為的自我審查，而訴訟乃透過三權分立，由司法做適法性之判斷。換言之本文所稱「訴願及其前置程序」，就係將現有機關自行審查切割為數階段，而其中又有為與訴願效果相當，或為類似訴願前審級之程序等。而各該程序在自我審查又或不利益變更禁止等原則，適用上又有無差異？其中審議過程與訴願本身有何差異？本文嘗試以各機關在辦理訴願之前置程序，人民之救濟率輔以實務及學說之見解，嘗試分析現行前置程序存在之效果，再就其必要性做討論，期待釐清這錯縱複雜的救濟程序，是否與人民訴訟權保障之憲法精神相符。
The dual system of Taiwan's Administrative remedy are divided into two tracks：The administrative appeal and the administrative procedure system. Substance to Article1(1) provision clause of the Administrative appeal, a priority procedure is recommended to apply in particular cases, which multiple results might apply, including an ex ante procedure, a replacement of Administrative appeal or an parallel of both depending on its legal affect, Thus increases the complexity of the Administrative remedy system.
The purpose of this article tends to discuss the problem of this complexity, whether the form of this article strengthened the protection of parties' right to fair trial or imposes troubleness. Furthermore, this article separates the discussion to estimate how the administrative appeal and ex ante procedure are divided in multiple stage, and quasi legal effect of the pre-administrative appeal procedure are being taken, considering the fact that the administrative appeal and ex ante procedure are set forth under the power of high concentration, making much difference compared with the Administrative procedure, relying on the judgment of the court.
Lastly, by comparing theory and practices, this article tends to analyze the legal effect and the necessity form to take out the ex ante procedure, hoping to make a clear guidance to the complicated design and suitable proposal in increasing the protection for right to fair trial.
