Salvete omnes!
Can anyone explain me please what the difference is between the infinitive and the subjunctive use in the following case:
Adductus sum hoc facere.
Adductus sum ut hoc fecerem.
When would you use one solution rather than the other? Or is there any one of them wrong?
Gratias plurimas,
Matthaeus
Adductus sum hoc facere.
Here what you have in an AcI construction, an accusative + infinitve. In the translation your accusative is the subject of the clause and the infinitive the verb.
Adductus sum ut hoc fecerem.
Here instead of an AcI you’ve got a clause with ut that demands the conjunctive. (ut+ conjuctive = …, so that)
The sentence means I was lead, so that I do. I’d use the ut sentence, AcI’s are normally used after verbs of the sense, e.g. “I saw, that…”, “he thought, that…” not normally “he was lead, that…”
Excuse me, I’m not an expert, but shouldn’t it be facerem?
probably just a typo 
clearly a typo
could be fecerim
Adductus sum hoc facere.
I don’t see how that would work as indirect statement.
The two sentences are exactly the same. Although inifnitives that look like infinitives of purpose are usually postclassical or poetic, here we have no less a warrant for its use than Cicero in his letters (Ad. Att. 11, 16) and his De legibus (2, 3). Normally with verbs like these you would expect the other construction with ut.
By the way, L&S suggest that the infinitive is used only with the passive voice of adduco. So it’s possible that eum adduxi hoc facere is bad Latin.
In order for the tenses to be parallel you would probably want facerem, but fecerim sounds good too.
Gratias ago vobis for the answers!
Indeed “fecerem” was a typo, “facerem” is the one I wanted to write down. 
I find in Latin there are plenty of possible solutions (that are gramtically correct) for an idea, but nonetheless each one has its own subtle difference… that’s one thing I find cool about Latin…