In order to impose fines that are effective, proportionate and dissuasive, the supervisory authority shall use for the definition of the notion of an undertaking as provided for by the CJEU for the purposes of the application of Article 101 and 102 TFEU, namely that the concept of an undertaking is understood to mean an economic unit, which may be formed by the parent company and all involved subsidiaries. In accordance with EU law and case-law*, an undertaking must be understood to be the economic unit, which engages in commercial/economic activities, regardless of the legal person involved (Recital 150)
* The ECJ case law definition is: «the concept of an undertaking encompasses every entity engaged in an economic activity regardless of the legal status of the entity and the way in which it is financed” (Case Höfner and Elsner, para 21, ECLI:EU:C:1991:161). An undertaking «must be understood as designating an economic unit even if in law that economic unit consists of several persons, natural or legal» (Case Confederación Española de Empresarios de Estaciones de Servicio [para 40, ECLI:EU:C:2006:784)
Art29WP, Guidelines on the application and setting of administrative fines for the purpose of the Regulation 2016/679, wp253 (2017)
In order to impose fines that are effective, proportionate and dissuasive, the supervisory authority shall use for the definition of the notion of an undertaking as provided for by the CJEU for the purposes of the application of Article 101 and 102 TFEU, namely that the concept of an undertaking is understood to mean an economic unit, which may be formed by the parent company and all involved subsidiaries. In accordance with EU law and case-law*, an undertaking must be understood to be the economic unit, which engages in commercial/economic activities, regardless of the legal person involved (Recital 150)
* The ECJ case law definition is: «the concept of an undertaking encompasses every entity engaged in an economic activity regardless of the legal status of the entity and the way in which it is financed” (Case Höfner and Elsner, para 21, ECLI:EU:C:1991:161). An undertaking «must be understood as designating an economic unit even if in law that economic unit consists of several persons, natural or legal» (Case Confederación Española de Empresarios de Estaciones de Servicio [para 40, ECLI:EU:C:2006:784)
Art29WP, Guidelines on the application and setting of administrative fines for the purpose of the Regulation 2016/679, wp253 (2017)
Source: https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=F98A8C27A0F54C30
(148) 為強化本規則之執行，對於本規則之任何違反，應被處以包括 行政罰鍰等處罰，此不問係外加於監管機關依照本規則實施之適當措 施，或取代該等措施。在僅有輕微之違反，或欲處以之罰鍰會造成對 當事人不相當之負擔，得採用告誡之方式取代罰鍰。然而，仍應就該 違反之性質、嚴重性、持續期間、是否為故意、有無降低損害之行為、 責任程度或先前任何相關違反之程度、監管機關知悉其違法行為後之 態度、命控管者或處理者所為措施之遵循、對行為守則之遵守以及有 無任何使之加重或減輕之因素，為相當之考慮。實施包括行政罰鍰之 處罰，應遵循歐盟法及憲章一般法律原則之適當程序保障，包括有效 之司法保護及正當程序。
(150) 為強化及協調違反本規則所處以之行政罰，各監管機關應有權 力處以行政罰鍰。本規則應指出何者構成違反，以及相關行政罰鍰的 上限及裁罰基準，此應由每個個案中之主管監管機關決定之，並考量 該個案情形所有相關之情狀，並適當考量該違反之性質、嚴重性及持 續期間及其後果，及確保遵循本規則所定義務所採取之措施及預防或 減輕該違反所造成之後果。對企業處以行政罰時，企業應被依照歐洲 聯盟運作條約第 101 條及第 102 條所定義之目的為理解。對個人而非 企業處以行政罰時，監管機關在考量適當之罰鍰金額時，應考量該會員國之平均所得，以及該個人之經濟狀況。一致性機制亦得被運用， 以促使行政罰鍰適用之一致性。此應由會員國決定是否得對公務機關 處以行政罰，以及至何程度。處以行政罰或給予警告並不影響監管機 關其他權力之行使，或本規則下其他處罰之實施。
Article 29 Working Party, Guidelines on the Application and Setting of Administrative Fines for the Purposes of the Regulation 2016/679 (2017).
Dutch data protection authority (Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens), Policy rules of 19 February 2019 with regard to determining the level of administrative fines (In Dutch, 2019).
