特別法條優於普通法條適用－－以金融詐騙罪行為類型的意義為分析視角

Special Articles Are Superior To Common Articles An Analysis With Financial Fraud 'Type' Crimes

特別法條與普通法條競合時，是否可以重法優於輕法為補充適用，近年來成為理論界爭議的話題。回答這一問題的關鍵，是充分認識刑法立法中行為類型化的價值，金融詐騙罪行為類型化的研究就是一個適當的分析視角。相對於普通詐騙罪而言，立法對於金融詐騙罪的被害人採取的是弱保護的刑事政策立場。對於金融詐騙犯罪等所涉及的特別法條，其各自的行為類型與意義，刑法理論必須給予基本的尊重。金融領域的制度安排，效益價值往往是其首要追求，儘管公平與安全也是制度的底線要求，但其公平和安全的內涵已經與一般市場領域中的公平、生活領域的安全含義不完全相同。針對市場領域的不法行為，還有民事、行政的規制手段。而這些構成了市場領域刑事立法規定的犯罪行為類型化或者定型化，以及相應的法定刑設置的價值所在。金融詐騙行為，在任何情形下都不應當按照生活領域的普通詐騙罪定罪處罰。對於立法已經作出罪刑相適應原則考量的特別法條，解釋者對立法的尊重才是貫徹罪刑相適應原則的體現，特別法條優先於普通法條適用的原則理應得到堅持。

When special articles and common articles are concurred in criminal law, whether the principle of adopting the harsher one as a supplementary application rule has become a topic of disputes in recent years' theoretical debate. The key to answer this issue is to fully realize the value of 'types' in criminal legislation. The financial crime is a very appropriate way to analyze this issue. Compared to general fraud, financial fraud legislation adopts the weakened version of 'protection of victims'. As to financial fraud and other related special articles, their type value shall be upheld by criminal theories. The institution arrangement of finance puts the value of 'efficiency' in priority, although fairness and security are among the bottom lines of its institutional arrangement, the meaning of fairness and security are wholly different from normal market place. To deal with illegal acts of market place, we have civil as well as administrative regulations, and those concerns constitute the value of 'typifying' or 'fixing' the criminal acts and their punishments in this area. Financial fraud, cannot, in any circumstances, to be treated as general fraud in life context. With special articles, legislation has made considerations according to the principle of 'crime equal to punishment'. Interpreters shall abide by this criminal law principle. The argument of special article superior to common articles needs to be upheld and preserved.