論排放毒物污染環境媒介罪：與各環境行政刑罰法規之關連性

The Analysis of the Amendment of Section 190-1 of Criminal Code: Correlation with Criminal Sanctions in Environmental Administrative Law

近年來環境污染問題引發社會輿論的矚目，2018年立法院三讀通過刑法第190條之1排放毒物污染環境媒介罪，除將原先「致生公共危險」之要件刪除外，另增定事業活動者之過失犯與加重結果犯，並調整一般犯與事業主犯罪的刑責輕重。其次，一方面增定未遂犯之處罰，另一方面又置入妾身未明的「情節輕微不罰」條款。由於犯罪要件規定多有模糊不清之處，引發學界、產業界及實務界的議論。此外，本罪與現有各環境行政刑罰法規之間的關係，亦需進一步釐清。本文首先針對本罪的制定背景及條文解釋，進行初步的檢視，再嘗試統整與本罪相關之環境刑罰法規，予以類型化，希望藉由橫跨不同法典間的考察，勾勒出我國環境刑法體系的圖像。我們應強化眾多環保法規橫向的聯繫，加強用語及規範體例上的一致性，並且在現有的環保行政法規當中，檢視刑罰投入的最適解何在。本文主張，作為事後犯罪處理的刑罰手段，很難適切發揮確保事前管制實效性的作用，因此，除了強制性的規定之外，應透過更靈活有效的制度誘因設計與教育啟發訓練，多管齊下。

In recent years, environmental pollution problem has attracted the attention of public opinion. In 2018, the Legislative Yuan passed the Amendment of Section 190-1 of Criminal Code, in which the element of “endanger concrete public safety” was removed. It means offenders who emit toxic substance or any other substance that may harm health to pollute the air, soil, or rivers or other bodies of water “without leading any public hazard” should be prosecuted. Also, according to the new section 190-1, A factory or business proprietor, supervisor, agent, employee or other personnel who commits the offense above in the performance of his occupation would be punished more severely. Besides, the penalties for attempted offenses and criminal offenses committed by manufacturer's negligence were added. On the other hand, the unclear and ambiguous clause called “slightly impunity” was placed. This amendment of Criminal Code has led to lots of discussions in the academic, industrial and practical circles. However, there is still an important issue that has not been fully discussed, which the correlation between the new section 190-1 of Criminal Code and the criminal sanctions in environmental administrative law needs to be further clarified. This article firstly takes a preliminary review of these offenses. Secondly, while trying to take an integrative point of view, the author reviews and classifies all current supplementary criminal sanctions in environmental administrative codes. Finally, this article suggests that we shall draw up a more appropriate guideline for criminal legislation from the perspective of environmental regulations and policy. Criminal penalties can only be adopted to maintain the impartiality and correctness of environmental administration. We shall not overestimate the general preventive effect of the criminalization. And besides we shall enhance public awareness and corporate compliance of environmental protection, not through using tools of criminal punishment, but through making compliance incentives truly effective.