以過失危險犯規制無人載具事故風險的立法評估──以自動駕駛車輛與遙控無人機為例

未來熱門的無人載具類型，如自駕車與無人機，使用率勢必將大幅提高而成為重要趨勢，但這些無人載具發生事故的風險仍難以刑法規範加以規制。尤其是在向來作為交通事故究責重心的過失致死、致傷等罪，將會因為欠缺特別的注意規範，以及行為人應該對於結果發生具有預見可能性的要求，在無人載具的事故風險預防方面顯得更為無力。本文因此認為，立法者可以進行典範轉移，評估是否可以過失危險犯此種犯罪類型來達成同樣的刑事政策目的。只要立法者明確標示出針對製造者、保有者與使用者各自具體的注意義務違反行為，以及運用仍保留結果要素的過失具體危險犯與過失適性犯之規定，應可大幅緩和對於過失危險犯正當性的疑慮。不僅如此，針對使用者運用尊重其危險判斷空間的過失具體危險犯、針對保有者與製造者運用特定中間結果要素的要求，確保其行為具備法益一般危險性特質的過失適性犯，將使刑法歸責仍然以行為人個人能力及其認知的極限為標準，更能在鼓勵科技創新的同時，達到管制科技風險的刑事政策效果。

In the future, the use of Unmanned Vehicles, such as Self-driving Cars and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, will increase significantly. But the risks of using such Unmanned Vehicles are difficult to grasp by the criminal law. Above all, the regulations of negligent homicide or bodily injury, which have played the decisive role in the attribution of traffic accidents up to now, still lack the specific standards of care concerning Unmanned Vehicles. Also, the requirement that the perpetrator must foresee the success makes the attribution of negligence to Unmanned Vehicle accidents always difficult to perform. Therefore, it is the time to change the paradigms in the legislation on criminal law. Legislators should consider using the crime of reckless endangerment to achieve the same criminal policy goal. First, it must clearly describe the respective standards of care of the user, owner and manufacturer and apply only the negligent concrete endangerment offense and negligent aptitude offense, which include the success element. Thus, the punishment on risks of Unmanned Vehicle is again to be decided in view of the individual ability and cognition of the offender. Furthermore, the pace of technical innovation may be constantly increasing, and indeed the direction of the development of technology may be constantly regulated by criminal law.