月旦知識庫
  1. 熱門:
 
首頁 臺灣期刊   法律   公行政治   醫學   財經   社會學   教育   其他 大陸期刊   核心   非核心 DOI文章
查看詳細全文
篇名
刑事沒收制度之現代化:2015年沒收實體法之立法疑義
並列篇名
The Modernization of Criminal Confiscatory System: The Legislative Issues about Substantive Law of Confiscation in 2015
作者 薛智仁
中文摘要
在爆發一連串食安醜聞,凸顯沒收不法利得的漏洞後,2015年底立法院倉促通過刑法修正草案,大幅改革刑事沒收制度。新法的核心構想在於沒收的「去從刑化」,沒收成為所謂「獨立的法律效果」,既非刑罰亦非保安處分。立法者除了零星修改既有的犯罪工具與產物的沒收規定之外,最重要的改革就是基於窮盡剝奪不法利得的精神,將犯罪所得沒收定位為所謂「準不當得利之衡平措施」,增訂第三人犯罪所得沒收與單獨宣告沒收,甚至明訂沒收新法之溯及既往效力。此一修正被譽為刑法的百年變革,被寄予打擊經濟犯罪的厚望。然而,本文將指出,新法在立法構想上不當地將沒收「去刑罰化」,僅執著於放寬犯罪所得沒收的可能性,既未能修正犯罪工具產物沒收之舊法缺陷,又輕率地解除罪刑法定原則及罪責原則對沒收的適用。整體上,沒收新法能否提升犯罪預防成效猶未可知,對於財產權的過度侵害卻已難以避免。沒收新法促成刑事沒收制度現代化,卻付出鞏固「治亂世用重典」思維的代價,有待立法者再次改革。
英文摘要
After a series of food safety scandals broke out and the events highlighted the loopholes of illegal benefits confiscation, in the end of 2015, the legislative yuan legislated the draft amendment of criminal law hastily and reformed the criminal confiscatory system in a significant way. The core idea of the new provision is to abolish the quality of subordinate sentence of criminal confiscation and make it an independent effect which is different from the penalty and the rehabilitative measure. Except for fragmentarily amending the existing confiscatory provisions about criminal tools and benefits, the most important reforms are typing the confiscation of criminal benefits a balanced measure quasi-unjustified enrichment, adding provisions about confiscating criminal incomes of third-party, and judges can announce confiscation independently, and above all are based on the spirit of depriving criminal benefits as far as possible. Besides, legislators also proclaimed the retroactive effect of the new provision. This amendment has been hailed as a century-old change in criminal law field and has been placed on high hopes of cracking down on economic crimes. Nevertheless, this article will point out that the new provision improperly abolishes the sentenced quality of criminal confiscation, persists in loosening the possibilities of confiscating criminal benefits, ignores to revise the defects in old provision about confiscating criminal tools and outcomes, and it removes sloppily from applying to the principle of no penalty without a law and the principle of culpability. On the whole, whether the new confiscating law can improve the effectiveness of crime prevention is still unknown, however it has been difficult to avoid the excessive damage to property rights. The new provision has no doubt promoted the modernization of criminal confiscatory system, but the fact is, it's based on the idea of ‘'Desperate Diseases Must Have Desperate Remedies''. Look forward to reforming it again.
起訖頁 1053-1123
關鍵詞 沒收犯罪所得沒收犯罪工具產物沒收違禁物沒收單獨沒收 獨立的法律效果準不當得利之衡平措施罪責原則溯及既往禁 止原則confiscationconfiscation of criminal benefitsconfiscation of criminal tools and outcomeconfiscation of criminal contrabandconfiscate independentlyindependence of law effectthe balanced measure quasi-unjustified enrichmentprinciple of culpabilityprinciple of non-retroactivity
刊名 國立臺灣大學法學論叢  
期數 201809 (47:3期)
出版單位 國立臺灣大學法律學系
該期刊-上一篇 賦予當事人個人資料財產權地位之優勢與侷限:以美國法為中心
該期刊-下一篇 醫療刑責過失程度之法實證分析:對醫療刑責合理化之省思
 

新書閱讀



最新講座


優惠活動




讀者服務專線:+886-2-23756688 傳真:+886-2-23318496
地址:臺北市館前路28 號 7 樓 客服信箱
Copyright © 元照出版 All rights reserved. 版權所有,禁止轉貼節錄