法律適用與規範漏洞──詐騙集團與網路博弈法律適用問題比較與評析

Legal Application and Loopholes of Regulation—Comparison and Analysis of Legal Application Issues Between Fraud Groups and Online Gambling

實務對於目前案件量最多，也最為繁雜的詐騙集團及網路博弈案件，其在處理上，沿用實務歷來所慣用的處理模式，亦即對於所處理的案件事實，在成罪認定的模式上，先確認基礎的構成要件該當之後，再將因犯罪所取得的不法利益，認定有洗錢之行為，而適用洗錢罪，且因其屬於集團性的結構，又再框入組織犯罪防制條例。就詐騙集團案件的論處模式來看，除法律關係認定的適用或有問題外，其論以洗錢、導入組織犯罪的認定關係，法律適用的爭議上，似乎於實務見解的爭議性比較少；而對應處理網路博弈的問題，則從基礎行為的構成要件該當，認定屬於刑法第268條的成罪適用，同樣在認定其有獲取暴利的情況，加上對於賭博財物係透過第三方支付平台的轉換，而認定具有洗錢的行為，且博弈網站的成員亦屬3人以上，故如詐騙集團法律關係的推論模式，亦框入組織犯罪防制條例之中。然此從基本成罪條件，再到洗錢行為的洗錢罪，後再加上組織犯罪論處，此種串聯式的處理模式，雖是屬於實務處理相關案件的既定認知模式，但從學理的分析與檢視下，顯然多有法律適用及法律關係認定的疑慮，在整體法律適用關係的推論上，亦充斥著矛盾與謬誤。此外，從事實基本成罪的構成要件該當判定上，非無規範適用上的問題，從而亦造成認定洗錢行為的洗錢罪，形同認定無據，而框以組織犯罪，更猶如是羅織適用的方式。深究其原因，應為刑法對應網路博弈事件的規範不足，而實務上勉強以推論式的適用。此非但無法免除法律規範對應網路賭博適用的疑慮，其所為具體法律適用，更形成邏輯上的錯誤。唯一解決之道，並非在於實務應如何調整適用的觀念，而是在規範不足，且具有規範必要性的前提下，應以立法的方式為妥善解決。在法律未為修正前，現行對應博弈網站事件的處理，充其量僅能以一般賭博罪的規定適用，否則會有類推適用的違法之虞。本文從事實面及規範面剖析具體事實的成罪關係，並對比二種類似適用的具體情狀，以及對於規範面適用問題的論述，以作為對應與修正處理相關案件時的思考方向。

In judicial practice, the most prevalent and complex cases currently involve fraud rings and online gambling. The handling of these cases follows conventional methods used in the judicial process. After confirming the basic elements of the crime, the illegal profits obtained are identified as money laundering activities, thereby applying the crime of money laundering. Given their organized structure, these cases are also categorized under the Organized Crime Prevention Act. From the perspective of fraud cases, aside from potential issues with the determination of legal relationships, there are comparatively fewer disputes regarding the identification of money laundering and the introduction of organized crime. In addressing online gambling issues, the relevant provisions of Article 268 of the Criminal Code are similarly applied, recognizing the acquisition of illegally exorbitant profits. If the gambling proceeds are transferred through third-party payment platforms, this is also classified as money laundering. Additionally, since the members of the gambling website consist of three or more individuals, this aligns with the reasoning applied in fraud cases, further categorizing them under the Organized Crime Prevention Act. However, this linked processing model—from the basic elements of the crime to the identification of money laundering, and then to the application of organized crime—raises doubts about legal applicability and the determination of legal relationships. The reasoning in the overall application of law is filled with contradictions and fallacies. The issues stem from determining the basic elements of the crime, which subsequently undermine the recognition of money laundering activities, making the application of organized crime appear to be an uncompelling interpretation. The root of this issue lies in the inadequacy of the Criminal Code regarding online gambling incidents, as practical applications struggle to find appropriate interpretations. This inadequacy fails to alleviate doubts about the legal norms applicable to online gambling, resulting in logical errors in specific legal applications. The only way to resolve this issue is not to adjust the practical applications of criminal codes, but to enact legislation that properly addresses these normative shortcomings. Until the law is amended, the handling of gambling website incidents can only apply the general provisions related to gambling crimes; otherwise, there is a risk of illegal analogical application. This article analyzes the factual elements of the crime from both factual and normative perspectives and discusses the issues related to the application of norms, serving as a reference for thought when addressing and rectifying related cases.