從法益衡量到利益衡量：違法阻卻事由的消弭與實質違法性的興起

From the Measurement of Legal Interest to the Measurement of Interest: The Degeneration of Excuse and the Rise of Essential Illegality

從古典犯罪論體系到新古典體系，價值判斷滲透，超法規違法阻卻事由如雨後春筍。與構成要件不同，違法阻卻事由發跡於理論，而後滲入立法之中。因此在違法性的判斷上，應當採用“倒置三段論”的邏輯思維，先對實質違法性進行定界。在此問題上，多元論雜亂無序、南轅北轍；社會相當理論言人人殊、言之無物。介於法益衡量說的固有缺陷，應當建構個體利益—制度利益—社會公共利益的三層次利益衡量理論，在構成要件之後進行實質違法性的檢視。違法阻卻事由只是實質違法性判斷後的類型化和具象化形式，遵從利益衡量規則的約束。

From the classical criminal system to the new classical criminal system, the elements of value entered, the justification out of regulations arise. Different from component, justification come from the theory, the enter the legislation. Therefore, when judging the illegality, the logic of “convert syllogism” should be taken to definite the essential illegality. In this point,the polyphyletic theory are mixed and disorderly. The theory of social due is too abstract. considering the weakness of the measurement of legal interest, the system of individual interestinterest of systemsocial interest should be constructed, and the essential illegality should be considered after component. Justification is the specific form of essential illegality and follow the rule of the measurement of interest.