民意代表的關說行為與賄賂罪的「職務關連性」

Elected Representative's Lobbying Behavior and the concept of related to official duties in the Crime of Bribery

本文處理立法委員等民意代表關說之行為，是否該當賄賂罪之「職務上行為」的問題。對此問題學說實務有試圖以「實質影響力」等參與他人事務的可能性為判斷基準者，也有試圖引進與公務員本人法定職務之間有無「職務關連性」概念處理者，大法庭裁定則試圖結合兩者，提出折衷之基準。本文以日本法作為比較法之素材，從日本法與我國法規範構造的不同，確認我國賄賂罪規定的解釋方向，其後再從民意代表法定權限的特性出發，確認該如何形塑民意代表基於法定權限之行為後，進一步針對各種學說與實務之見解，以及大法庭之折衷說，一一分析批判之後，最後提出自己的看法。

This article deals with the question of whether the behavior of legislators and other elected representatives in relation to lobbying should be regarded as the ''official act'' of the crime of acceptance of bribes. In order to solve this issue, some opinion attempted to use the concept of“substantial influence”, others try to introduce the concept of related to official duties, the Supreme Court's decision has attempted to combine the two and come up with a compromise standard. This article takes Japanese law as the material for comparison, and confirms the direction of the interpretation of the provisions of the crime of acceptance of bribes in Taiwan from the difference in the construction of the norms between Japanese law and Taiwanese law, and then confirms how to judge the behavior of the representatives of public opinion based on the legal duties from the characteristics of the legal authority of the elected representatives, and then further puts forward its own views after criticizing the views of various doctrines and practices.