由量刑目的及基準析論國民參與審判案件之量刑評議

An Analysis of Sentencing Deliberations in Citizen Judge Cases Based on Sentencing Objectives and Standards

國民法官法於民國112年1月1日施行後，針對該法第5條第1項規定之罪，法官就必須與國民法官共同認定事實及量刑，而一般國民雖有判斷事實發生與否的生活體驗，卻缺乏量刑經驗，故法官如何與國民法官進行量刑評議即為重要課題。本文基於量刑目的及基準為量刑之出發點，考量國民法官法施行細則僅就量刑目的及基準為框架規範，爰以日本學說及實務對量刑目的及基準的討論為基礎，參酌國內學說及實務現況，探討國民參與審判案件下的量刑基準及說明方式；並進一步從量刑基準之角度，對量刑事實之輔助討論工具、事實型量刑資訊系統的運用提出建言，期使量刑評議得以聚焦於量刑基準，並使量刑理由更具說明力、合理性及可理解性。

With the implementation of the Citizen Judges Act on January 1, 2023, judges are required to work with citizen judges to jointly determine both facts and sentencing in cases involving public participation. While ordinary citizens may utilize their life experiences to assess whether certain facts occurred and apply this reasoning to fact-finding, they generally lack experience in determining appropriate penalties for specific crimes. Sentencing requires significant value judgment, especially in translating a criminal act into a concrete and specific penalty, a process that varies greatly among individuals. Thus, a critical issue is how judges can effectively collaborate with citizen judges in sentencing deliberations, enabling them to make sentencing decisions based on established standards. At the same time, these decisions must balance fairness in sentencing with individualized considerations while adequately reflecting the public’s legitimate legal sentiments and perspectives.
This paper begins with sentencing purposes and standards as the foundation of its analysis. It notes that while the enforcement rules of the Citizen Judges Act provide a framework for sentencing purposes and standards, they do not specify explanation methods or detailed procedures for each stage of deliberation. Drawing on the Japanese lay judge system, which served as a primary reference during the drafting of Taiwan’s Citizen Judges Act, and discussions from Japanese theories and practices on sentencing purposes and standards, this study incorporates domestic theoretical and practical developments to explore sentencing standards most suitable for Taiwan’s citizen judge trials.
The paper proposes methods to assist presiding judges in explaining sentencing purposes and standards during deliberations. Furthermore, it offers concrete recommendations on tools for aiding discussions of sentencing factors, such as the sticky note method and survey techniques, as well as the use of fact-based sentencing information systems and the trends they present. These tools aim to focus deliberations on sentencing standards, enhancing the clarity, explanatory power, and reasonableness of sentencing decisions. By aligning these practices with the public’s healthy legal sentiments, this approach seeks to fulfill the legislative objectives of the Citizen Judges Act.