刑事再審制度之過去、現在與未來

我國刑事特別救濟制度採「雙軌制」，即分為「再審」與「非常上訴」；前者，所謂「再審」係針對確定判決所認定之事實錯誤，而向原審法院提起救濟之程序。後者，係原確定判決有違背或適用法令之錯誤，由最高檢察署檢察總長向最高法院提起非常上訴予以糾正，二者性質迥異。本文除了專就再審制度之各國立法例，以及我國立法與傳統實務見解之缺失；並就2015年2月4日修法為說明，及其再審制度未來尚待解決之問題，提出相關之對策，以謀求改進之道。

關鍵字

特別救濟程序；確定判決；再審制度；非常上訴；一事不再理

並列摘要

The special remedy proceeding provided in the Criminal Procedure Code is twofold, namely, Retrial and Extraordinary Appeal. The former, i.e. Retrial, is a remedy proceeding to the court that made the final judgment based on the fabricated or altered fact. The latter will applies when the final judgment is in contravention of the laws and regulations or if the applicable laws are not applied or are erroneously applied and the chief-procurator of the Supreme Prosecutors Office may file an extraordinary appeal to the Supreme Court for remedy. Those two remedies are different in nature. this article compares the Retrial system of the other countries with our legislation and the traditional opinion in practice so as to find out the shortcoming of ours. Further, to explain the amendment on 2015 February 4 and to identify the problem of the Retrial system to be resolved in the future. In the end, this study proposes a corresponding counter measure for solution and improvement.