共犯自白與補強法則

Confessions of Accomplice and the Corroborating Rule

相較於被告的自白，由於共犯的陳述的虛偽風險更高，故我國刑事訴訟法第156條第2項也規範了共犯自白的補強法則。然而這樣的補強法則在適用上是否與被告自白的情形不同？特別是在被告否認犯罪，而共犯指被告犯罪的情形，是否可能需要更加的謹慎？這都是必須考慮的課題，本文以一則案例為對象，嘗試比較共犯自白的補強法則與被告自白的不同之處，並提出個人的見解。

Since the risk of falsification of an accomplice’s statement is higher than that of the defendant’s confession, Article 156(2) of Criminal Procedure Law also regulates the supplementary rule of confession of an accomplice. However, is the application of such a remedial rule different from that of the defendant’s confession? In particular, in cases where the defendant denies the crime and the accomplice accuses the defendant of the crime, this issue should be more cautious. This article uses a case to compare the differences between the co-conspirator’s confession and the defendant’s confession, and to offer a personal opinion.