犯罪物沒收

Confiscation of Criminal Object

刑法沒收的新規範體系，跳脫刑罰與保安處分的法律效果思維，不再將沒收定位為從刑。而國家剝奪犯罪物使用、收益等處分權利的法理基礎，與「利得沒收」應有不同依據。本文以沒收干預手段之維護公共利益與沒收標的之財產權濫用禁止的刑事政策，認為可以財產權管制的比例原則，建構犯罪物沒收的法理依據，並因此說明犯罪物沒收原型的判斷標準，與犯罪物沒收及於第三人的檢視要件。藉以在適用結果上徹底貫徹與犯罪關聯的物之歸咎意義，並在國家保障人民財產權的法治理念前提下，消滅犯罪憑藉、達成維護社會治安的全民期待。

The new criminal law confiscation norms that began to implement since July 1, 2016 has already let the legal effect escaped from punishment and Rehabilitative Measures, and showing the different meaning between criminal object comfiscation and criminal proceeds comfiscation. Therefore, comfiscation have a new and complete system appearance and no longer being treated as accessory punishments.
Compared to criminal proceeds comfiscation, the legal basis of depriveing criminal object by nation should have different interpretation, and should get rid of the traditional “punishment” or “Rehabilitative Measures” classification restrictions. While interrogation the criminal policy of interrogation confiscated interventions to safeguarding the public interest and prohibit abusing of property rights, we could considerate the appropriateness of the principle of proportionality in interference to property right, and achieve universal expectations of eradication of crime, maintaining social order by completely deprived of benefits associated with the crime at the national law to protect people’s property rights concept premise.