拒絕酒測致吊銷駕照之研究──反思大法官釋字第699號解釋

The Research on Driver License Suspended Cause of Refused to Take the Sobriety Test: Reflection on Grand Justice Interpretation No. 699

本文針對大法官釋字第699號解釋及相關評論提出反思，認為拒絕酒測係拒絕提供體內酒精濃度之訊息，其與體內尿液含毒成分相同，均屬於資訊隱私權的範疇，由此檢視拒絕酒測致吊銷駕照之阻卻違憲，即難謂符合比例原則。再者，視駕駛人體內酒精濃度的多寡，一方面涉及刑法不能安全駕駛罪，另一方面，違反行政法道交條例之規定，前者酒精濃度係不可或缺的刑事證據，強制抽血即具有正當性；後者駕駛人拒絕酒測時，尚無法知悉其體內酒精濃度，故屬於行政執行事項，透過「擬制的基礎處分」之穿針引線，得出即時強制仍須以行政處分設定法義務，闡述即時強制係縮短程序，乃相對於階段性之延伸程序的例外，主張以直接強制的手段，進行強制酒測；文末，提出修法建議。

This research is bring up the reflection on Grand Justice Interpretation No. 699 and related comment, the author considers that refused to take the sobriety test is refused to offer the information of internal alcohol concentration just as offer the information drug components by urine test, both of situations are part of information privacy. Furthermore, the driver’s blood alcohol concentration concerns with disable from driving safely of Criminal Code and violating Road Traffic Management Penalities Regulation. The former is indispensable evidence which is legitimacy, the latter is belongs to administrative execution. Then expounds the force immediately is equal to abbreviated procedure by the hypothetically basic instruction, and advocates should force directly taking the sobriety test. In conclusion proposes some suggestions to amending the Law.