行政處罰的概念構造──新《行政處罰法》第2條解釋

新《行政處罰法》第2條增設了行政處罰的概念條款。該條內含的“減損權益或者增加義務的方式”“違反行政管理秩序”“懲戒”三項要素，應分別以“不利益性”“違法性”“報應性”加以歸納和解釋。其中，“不利益性”是行政處罰的第一要素。行政處罰的標的是“利益”而非“權利”。利益是價值中立的，本身並不存在合法與非法之分，行政處罰的制裁物件並不必然是合法的。“違法性”是行政處罰的第二要素。在“違法性”判斷上，應奉行實質違法性立場。“違法性”決定了“面向合法行為實施的行政強制措施”等同樣具有“不利益性”的制裁行為，不是行政處罰。“報應性”是行政處罰的第三要素。行政處罰主要是出於懲戒、打擊和報復，而非恢復和預防，這是區分行政處罰與“責令限期改正”等行為不可或缺的標準。

The newly adopted Law on Administrative Penalty has added the concept clause of administrative penalty as Article 2.The three elements contained in this article,“reducing rights and interests or increasing obligations”,“violation of the administrative order”and“penalty”,should be summarized and explained in terms of“non-interest”,“illegality”and“retribution”respectively. Among them,“non-interest”is the first element of administrative penalty. The object of administrative penalty is“interest”rather than“right”.Interest is value-free and there is no legality and illegality in itself, so the object of administrative penalty is not necessarily legal.“Illegality”is the second element. In the judgment of“illegality”,substantial illegality standard should be adopted.“Illegality”determines that“administrative coercive measures for legal acts”and other sanctions with“non-interest”are not administrative penalties.“Retribution”is the third element. Administrative penalty is mainly for penalty, sanction and retaliation rather than recovery and prevention, which is an indispensable yardstick to distinguish administrative penalty from “ordering correction within a time limit”and other administrative actions.