強制猥褻罪不罰未遂？──從臺高院110年上訴字第1257號判決談起

Mandatory Impunity for Attempted Indecent Assault?–Concurrently Comment on the Taiwan High Court’s Criminal Judgment 110 Shangsuzi No.1257

本文旨在以現行強制猥褻罪未罰及未遂之法律真空問題為論述基礎，考察「猥褻」概念之發展軌跡與學說理論演變，就臺灣高等法院題旨判決予以評價，提出隨著性強制犯罪保護法益之內涵調整，司法實務恐難再依傳統判例法則一體適用，為避免與實際情況脫節，宜發展一套可遵循之新的解釋取徑，繼而反思現行性強制犯罪概念內涵與保護架構是否有重構必要，及如何成為可能？
傳統植基於「妨害社會風化」，所生成的性強制犯罪概念內涵與保護架構，於現今保護性自主決定權法益前提下，已無法有效地解釋並解決「妨害性自主」之規範性意涵；司法在闡釋性強制犯罪時，應符合國人對性自主活動的認知與想像，以框架出性自主決定權的本質核心範疇，作為捍衛守護性自主決定權之判斷準據。
本文的結論是，強制猥褻罪存有保護不足現象，亦即可罰性的漏洞，需要被填補，應調整現行解釋論基礎，進而改變性強制犯罪的司法論證和判斷標準，朝向更彈性且適應社會真實脈絡轉變；若短期難以改變司法文化下，修法將強制猥褻未遂犯納入處罰，填補此一法律漏洞，亦不失為一折衷辦法，深盼能提供一些啟發性意義。

The purpose of this article is to discuss the current legal vacuum of unpunished and attempted compulsory indecent crimes, to examine the development track and theoretical evolution of the concept of“indecency”, to evaluate the subject judgment of the Taiwan High Court, and to propose the protection of legal interests with sexual coercive crimes. To adjust the connotation, judicial practice may no longer be applied in a unified way according to the traditional precedents. In order to avoid being out of touch with the actual situation, it is advisable to develop a new set of interpretation methods that can be followed, and then reflect on whether the connotation and protection framework of the existing compulsory crime concept are important. necessary, and how is it possible?
Tradition based on“obstructing social morality”, and the conceptual connotation and protection framework of sexual coercive crime generated cannot effectively explain and solve the normative meaning of“impairing sexual autonomy”under the premise of today’s protective discretionary rights and legal interests; When the judiciary interprets sexual compulsory crimes, it should conform to the people’s cognition and imagination of sexual autonomy activities, and frame the essential core categories of sexual autonomy as the criterion for defending the guardianship of sexual autonomy.
The conclusion of this article is that there is insufficient protection in the crime of compulsory indecency, that is, the loophole of punitiveness, which needs to be filled. The basis of the current interpretation theory should be adjusted, and then the judicial reasoning and judgment standards of the crime of sexual compulsory crime should be changed to be more flexible and adaptable. The real context of the society has changed; if it is difficult to change the judicial culture in the short time, the amendment of the law to include the punishment of attempted indecent assault to fill this legal loophole can be regarded as a compromise solution, and I hope to provide some useful suggestions.