英文摘要 |
The newly amended Criminal Code has re-characterized confiscation as independent legal effect. Such amendment has thus jointly removed the criminal elements that constitute confiscation of criminal tools. At the same time, all tools used for crimes provided by non-defendants shall be considered within the reach of confiscation. Following the amendment of the confiscation system in the Criminal Code, further amendment of corresponding special criminal law has been carried out. All tools provided for committing crimes shall be accordingly confiscated whether they belong to the offenders or not. To be noted, the confiscation of all tools used for crimes provided by non-defendants according to the Criminal Code is still determined by whether the criminal tools are provided or obtained by the owners with or without proper reasons. Contrarily, the special criminal law has been introduced the system of extended confiscation of proceeds of crimes, in which all tools used for crimes shall be confiscated regardless of whether they are provided or obtained by the owners with or without legitimate reasons. This condition involves the right of property guaranteed to the people specified in Article 15 of the Constitution. Therefore, the constitutionality of the above-mentioned system should be reconsidered. In this paper, the author reviewed and analyzed the Supreme Court verdicts concerning extended confiscation of all tools used for crimes provided by non-defendants specified in the amended special criminal law from the perspectives of comparative law and the right of property guaranteed to the people by the Constitution. In addition, some viewpoints and opinions are presented in this paper and serve as a reference. |