從訴訟多樣性觀點再論法院於刑事程序中之職權調查義務──以公害犯罪為例

A Reconsideration of Inquisitorial Investigation of Criminal Court from the Viewpoint of Diversified Litigation Types–Taking Public Nuisance Crimes as an Example

本文指出有關職權調查義務之有無與其範圍劃界問題之關鍵，係在於無罪推定原則與刑事訴訟構造論之間的關係，而我國最高法院101年度第2次刑事庭會議（一）決議卻混淆兩者之關係採取片面職權調查義務說之立場，實難謂為妥適。於此前提下，本文以日本法之相關議論作為比較法研究之素材，基於所謂「訴訟多樣性觀點」提出「浮動式職權調查義務論」，並以公害犯罪為具體例，析論了在以當事人主義為主並輔以職權主義之訴訟構造下，應如何調和兩主義之關係以定職權調查義務之有無與範圍；最後再以此為基礎對我國刑事訴訟法第163條提出立法修正建議案作結。

This paper points out that the key to the question of whether there is an obligation to inquisitorial investigate and how to demarcate its scope lies in the relationship between the principle of presumption of innocence and the theory of criminal procedure structure. The 2012 Second Criminal Divisions Conference of the Supreme Court of the R.O.C. took the position of the so-called one-sided obligation of inquisitorial investigate because of confusing the relationship. Therefore, this paper argues that this Divisions is not appropriate. Under this premise, this paper uses the relevant discussions of Japanese law as the material for comparative law research, and proposes the socalled“floating inquisitorial investigation obligation theory”based on the“viewpoint of diversified litigation types”. Specifically, taking public nuisance crimes as an example, it reviews how to properly determine whether there is an obligation to investigate of court and determine its scope under the litigation structure of the current law with adversary system as the main and inquisitorial system as the supplement. Finally, as a conclusion, based on the previous analysis, it proposes legislative amendments to Article 163 of the Criminal Procedure Law of Taiwan.