商標混淆誤認之避免，實為保護廣義商標權及商標識別性之體現，雖然其判斷得以借助「商標混淆誤認之虞審查基準」之規定，只不過，從智慧財產法院104年度民商上字第13號民事判決中可以看出，商標售後混淆誤認理論之建立，實際上卻被我國商標法制所遺忘。售後混淆誤認理論乃起源於美國，然究其本質，僅是將混淆誤認的判斷主體加以擴張，使之包括「潛在」消費者在內；以商標法保護消費者利益之立法目的為由來看，商標法理應明文或間接承認售後混淆誤認為混淆誤認類型之一種。是故，為深入探討售後混淆誤認之理論發展與實務操作，本文擬結合美國法院承認售後混淆誤認之見解，並檢討我國相關之法院判決，加以論述：商標法若採取明文或間接承認售後混淆誤認之修法方向，確有助於完整的保護消費者之利益，更能夠避免商標與商品之連結失去價值，此外，亦不須修改「商標混淆誤認之虞審查基準」等規定，而不會產生規範適用混亂，有如此之立法優勢，特別是各級法院將得以依法，防止售後混淆誤認所致生之商標侵權行為。 Avoiding trademark confusion in reality protects broad trademark rights and distinctiveness. Although one can judge trademark confusion by the “Examination Guidelines on the Likelihood of Confusion,” theories of post-sale confusion are blurred in Taiwanese trademark laws as could be observed by the 2015 case of Min-Shang-San-Zi-13 in the Taiwan Intellectual Property Court. Although theories of post-sale confusion originated from the U.S., post-sale confusion essentially extends the judging bodies of trademark confusion to “potential” consumers. To ensure consumer interest protection in the Taiwan Trademark Act, post-sale confusion should be directly or indirectly acknowledged as a form of trademark confusion. In order to further discuss the theories and practices of post-sale confusion, this article attempts to introduce recognizing post-sale confusion decisions made by the U.S. courts and analyze the relevant Taiwanese courts’ decisions to propose that the Taiwan Trademark Act be amended to acknowledge post-sale confusion. If this amendment is carried out, it can result in considerable legislative advantages, such as protection of consumer interests, avoidance of loss of value between trademarks and goods. It can also prevent the amendment of related regulations of the “Examination Guidelines on Likelihood of Confusion” without causing confusion in applying laws. Courts, especially, can therefore prevent trademark infringements caused due to post-sale confusion by amending the Taiwan Trademark Act.