共同正犯過剩時的結果歸屬判斷──兼論最高法院109年度台上字第1790號刑事判決及其歷審裁判

The Consequence Attribution Issue in the Case of Excess in Joint Principals-A Comment on the Supreme Court Judgement No. 1790-109

傷害罪共同正犯的一員逾越當初犯意聯絡，獨自實施殺人行為並造成死亡結果時，我國判例實務及學說見解大多依照最高法院50年台上字第1060號判例的意旨，認定其他共同犯罪者毋須與過剩行為人共同對該死亡結果負責；然而，該死亡結果的責任能否另行透過因果關係或客觀預見可能性等要件，歸屬給原初的共同傷害行為，進而讓其他共同犯罪者成立傷害致死罪，則尚無定論。針對上述爭議，本文試圖以最高法院109年度台上字第1790號判決及其歷審判決為主要研究對象，歸納出在傷害罪共同正犯發生過剩時，我國判例實務所採取的幾種結果歸屬判斷模式，並結合我國及日本的學說見解，提出若干的檢討與反思。

When a member of the joint principal offender of injury went beyond the original intent and committed murder alone and resulted in death, the practice and doctrine of Taiwan mostly followed the Supreme Court Judgment No. 1060/50, which determined that other joint offenders need not be involved in excess. But the question, can the victim’s death be attributed to the original injury by joint principal offenders by factors of causality or objective predictability etc., is not yet solved. This article attempts to take the Supreme Court Judgment No, 1790/109 and its prior court judgments as the main research objects, and summarize different models of the judgment on attribution of consequence (Erfolgszurechnung) in Supreme Court Judgments, when excess happened in joint principal of injury (Exzess des Mittäters). The purpose of this study is to review of the Supreme Court’s judgments by combining with Taiwan and Japan’s theories.