論構成要件外效果作為量刑因子－－重新釐定刑法第57條第9款之射程範圍

On Extra-Component Effects as Sentencing Factors: Redefining the Scope of Section 57(9) of the Criminal Code

本文旨在釐清構成要件外效果須符合何要件，始屬我國刑法第57條第9款「犯罪所生之危險或損害」的射程範圍，而得作為從重量刑因子。其重要性在於，構成要件外效果既未明示於法定構成要件中，則射程廣大無垠，倘未限縮，則犯罪論多年戮力發展的現代歸責理論將形同崩毀。鑒於至今研究闕如，本文將先爬梳我國司法院量刑指引及實務判決，繼而評述德國刑法第46條第2項第2句「犯行之可歸咎效果」在實務與學說的豐富觀點。接續從憲法上規範性人類圖像出發，依序梳理刑罰目的爭議、刑罰目的與量刑目的的交織關係、量刑罪責中犯行罪責（Tatschuld）與行為人罪責（Täterschuld）的糾葛。最終主張構成要件外效果唯有符合下述前提時，始得作為「犯罪所生之危險或損害」意義下的從重量刑因子：（一）系爭效果必須落入所違犯之構成要件保護範圍，而屬真正具有量刑法上意義的犯行效果；（二）系爭效果必須與犯行具有因果關係且客觀上可歸責；且（三）行為人主觀上對系爭效果的招致至少具有預見可能性。

The purpose of this article is to clarify the prerequisites for extra-component effects to fall within the range of“danger or damage arising from the crime”in Article 57, Paragraph 9 of the Criminal Law, and to be regarded as aggravating factors in sentencing. This paper proposes a three-stage examination system for the extra-component effects. The only way to be regarded as an aggravating factor in accordance with Article 57(9) of the Criminal Law is to meet the following prerequisites: (1) the effect in question must fall within the scope of protection of the component element violated, (2) the effect must be causally related to the offense and objectively imputable, and (3) the perpetrator must have at least a foreseeable likelihood of incurring the effect.