食品犯罪中的攙偽或假冒──以富味鄉混油事件判決為中心（附談頂新判決）

The Adulterated Foods or Counterfeited Products in Foods Offenses-Focusing on the Judgement in the Case of Flavor Full Foods’s Mixed Oil Event (With Reference to the Judgement of the Ting Hsin Case)

食安法的立法目的固在維護國民健康，但消費者的財產及對於正確的資訊期待也一樣受到保障。食安法中的攙偽或假冒屬於抽象危險犯。抽象危險犯雖有過度擴張刑罰的疑慮，但這是立法本意，目的是為了周全保護法益，為了實務操作的方便，為了傳達貫徹刑罰的決心。實務判決固然不必討好輿論，做出媚俗的判決；但對於社會矚目的案件，卻要更加小心謹慎，在法理上無懈可擊，否則司法權將難以發揮平衡社會利益的作用，甚至引來不必要的惡評。

The objective of Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation is to protect not only the health of citizens, but also the property right of consumers and their right to obtain correct information. The provisions that prohibit adulterated foods or counterfeited products set out in Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation is designed to punish the mere endangerment of legal interests. Although such a design in law might be questioned by the public for enlarging the scope of penalty, this design is in line with the objective of the Act, namely to protect the legal interests of the public. Relevant rules are easy to apply, which also convey the determination to deter such an offence. It is impossible for the Court to make every member of the public satisfied with relevant judgments. Nonetheless, it is necessary for the judges to be extremely cautious, especially when they deal with the cases that have been under the spotlight. The reasons in the relevant judgments should be convincing. Otherwise, it will be very difficult for the judicial branch to protect social interests. Also, controversial judgments might trigger harsh comments.