從大法庭制度談判決先例拘束原則：以刑事實體法領域為中心

Grand Chamber and Stare Decisis: Focus on Substantive Criminal Law

本文旨在從大法庭制度談判決先例拘束原則，並以該制度於刑事實體法領域之運用為討論對象。2019年7月4日實施大法庭制度以前，我國向來係透過具有司法行政性質之最高法院法官會議決議與選編判例的方式來統一見解，以司法行政作用表示法律見解，決議與判例具有法規範般之通案之拘束力，但迭遭批評。
伴隨著大法庭的設置，我國廢除決議及判例制度，透過大法庭的運作來確保法律適用一致性、促進法律續造，透過個案裁判來統一見解，使司法權得以回歸個案審判。在大法庭新制之下，大法庭裁定基於審判權之作用，在案件當事人參與下，僅會針對具體個案，在具體個案事實之連結下表示法律見解，大法庭之裁定僅為中間裁定，只對該案件及當事人發生個案效力，而沒有通案效力，不及於其他案件。
從此一制度目的出發，值得探討的問題是，如何確保法律適用之一致性，以及如何促進法律續造，何時應該遵循先前裁判之見解，又何時應該進行法律續造，從而，有思考判決先例拘束原則之必要。由此一問題意識出發，本文先簡述大法庭制度之源起，並檢視現行大法庭制度之運作，進而加以省思，透過考察判例在我國法律體制中的定位、應有機能及其運作，同時以刑事實體法領域的討論為對象，藉以展望大法庭制度及判決先例拘束原則之發展。

This article aims to discuss the principle of Stare Decisis based on the new establishment of the grand chamber system. Before the grand chamber system was implemented on July 4, 2019, the judicial system had always unified legal opinions through the resolutions of the Supreme Court Judges’Conference and the selection of precedents, which have a judicial administrative nature. The legally binding power of precedents has often been criticized.
With the establishment of the grand chamber, the judicial system has abolished the traditional resolution and precedents system. Now, through the operation of the Grand Chamber, we try to ensure the consistency of legal application, to promote legal renewal, and to unify legal opinions. The court can focus on correctly fact finding by evidence and interpretation and application of law on each case. Under the new system of the grand chamber, the grand chamber's ruling is based on the role of judicial power. With the participation of the parties to the case, the grand chamber's ruling will only express legal opinions on specific cases, rather than explain the general legal theories. The grand chamber’s ruling is only an interlocutory ruling, and only for the case and the parties concerned, but has no general effect.
From the purpose of the grand chamber system, the issues are how to ensure the consistency of legal application, how to promote legal renewal, when should consistent opinions be followed, and when should legal renewal be carried out, so that it is necessary to think about the principle of Stare Decisis. This article first briefly describes the origin of the grand chamber system, and examines the operation of the current grand chamber system. Second, it examines the position, function and operation of precedents in the judicial system. Third, it focuses on the discussion in the field of substantive criminal law to look forward to the development of the grand chamber system and the principle of Stare Decisis.