2018年刑事實體法之回顧

Developments in the Law in 2018: Criminal Law

本文以2018年修正之刑法條文，以及最高法院於2018年之相關刑法裁判作為回顧之重心。2018年刑法僅針對第190條之1有關環境刑法之規定加以修正。從立法過程來看，本條規定之修正背景，乃立法委員認為舊刑法要求環境污染行為必須出現「致生公共危險」之結果，在舉證上非常困難，使得過去某些環境破壞行為者，因為無法證明發生污染之結果與因果關係，僥倖逃過刑法制裁，造成民怨。此次修法之方向，刪除「致生公共危險」一語，改採「抽象危險犯」之立法，就是為了要放寬環境犯罪之成罪標準，此外，並修法加重對於環境破壞行為之刑罰規定，以嚴懲環境破壞行為。就2018年之最高法院判決，本文則聚焦於與詐騙集團有關犯罪之刑法適用疑義。尤其聚焦於以下兩個問題，其一，乃加重詐欺罪與參與犯罪組織罪之競合問題；其二則為詐騙集團成員得否允許於著手實行詐騙行為後主張「著手後脫離」之爭議。這些爭議在2018年出現的最高法院相關判決中，有相關之探討，故本文以下亦針對這些問題加以說明與分析。

This paper focuses on the Criminal Code amended in 2018 and the decisions related to criminal law made by the Supreme Court in 2018 for discussion and review. In 2018, only the provision in Article 190-1 related to criminal law on the environmental destruction was amended. From the perspective of legislative process, the background of the amendment of this provision is that, the legislators argue that the old Criminal Code requires environmental pollution must cause “public danger”. However, the cause between public danger and environmental destruction is very difficult to prove. As a result, some environmental destroyers narrowly escaped from the criminal sanctions in the past because it was impossible to prove the pollution results and the causation, which raised public disapproval and social grievances. The goal of this provision amendment is to eliminate the elements of “public danger” and “causation”. Therefore, the act environmental destruction is easier to be persecuted. The amended provision also increased criminal punishment to prevent the act of environmental destruction. In terms of the decisions made by the Supreme Court in 2018, this paper focuses on the applications of the criminal law related to crimes committed by fraudulent groups. In recent years, telephone or internet scams have become a serious issue. A behavioral pattern of “aggravated false pretense” in Article 339-4 was added to the Criminal Code in June 2014 in order to increase the punishment of fraud. Regardless, in recent years, various disputes about the application and punishment related to aggravated false pretense still appear in practical decisions. Whether the behavior of these fraudulent groups can be also applied to the Organized Crime Prevention Act is highly concerned。Therefore, in this paper, two decisions made by the Supreme Court in 2018 are selected to be discussed.