法人裁罰方式之研究

Research on the Ways of Punishment of Legal Persons

不論各國立法例及學理對於「法人得否為犯罪主體」之見解不一，依我國附屬刑法罪名，立法已經明白承認法人乃適格之犯罪主體，最常見的是兩罰規定下，對法人之負責人處以自由刑，再另以規定處法人罰金刑。惟法人與自然人之經濟資力差距甚大，因此，學者對此多有批評，極力主張二者應切斷其關聯性而為脫鉤處理。而國際上對於法人裁罰原則上也適用罰金刑，且其額度均比自然人之罰金刑還高，本文茲舉美國量刑指南對法人罰金量刑及德國日額罰金刑為例，檢討現行法人罰金刑。再者，法人之裁罰是否僅限於罰金刑，就外國立法例言，大都並無此限制，甚至為達成刑罰特別預防之目的，並進一步保護被害人，避免法人再犯，均設計罰金刑以外之裁罰手段，例如美國之被害賠償命令、日本之業務改善命令、法國專門適用於法人之資格刑等等，再彈性地搭配擴大適用之緩刑及緩起訴制度，透過法遵計畫之整備，降低對社會經濟、員工、無辜股東之損害性。

"Regardless of the different national legislations and academic theories regarding ''whether a legal person can be a subject of crime'', according to our subsidiary criminal law, the legislation has clearly recognized that a legal person is a qualified criminal subject. Under the two penalties. natural persons are sentenced to imprisonment, and legal persons are fined by regulations. However, there is a huge gap between the economic resources of legal persons and natural persons. Therefore, scholars have criticized strongly advocated that the two should be disconnected from each other. Internationally, fines applied to legal persons are higher than those of natural persons. This paper adopts the US Sentencing Guidelines for legal persons' fines and German daily fines as examples to review the current legal person's fine penalties. Furthermore, most of foreign legislation do not have restrictions of legal persons to fine penalties, and even for the purpose of special prevention of penalties, and to further protect victims and avoid legal persons from re-offending, sanctions other than fines are designed. Such as the United States’Victim Compensation Order, Japan’s Business Improvement Order, France’s qualification penalties specifically applicable to legal persons, etc., can be flexibly matched with the extended application of probation and prosecution systems. Through the maintenance of the legal compliance plan, it can reduce the harm to the social economy, employees, and innocent shareholders."