- 期刊
可教化量刑與矯治之探討
A Probe into Civilizable Sentencing and Correction
摘要
依刑法第57條之意旨，罪責是量刑的決定性因子，其次是同條所列十款尤應注意之事項，再其次則是其他一切應審酌之事項。立法者既然做了這樣的安排，刑事司法在適用法律時，除非法律有違憲之情形，否則就不應違反立法者所已經明示的意旨。從刑法第57條之規定可知立法者並沒有將教化可能性明文例示為量刑尤應注意之事項，解釋上自不應任意將其由一般的參考因子，提昇為次要的因子，更不應提昇為主要的決定性因子，否則就有違反罪刑法定原則之嫌。刑事司法實務大幅提昇教化可能性在量刑上的重要性，甚至在涉及死刑的案件，有意將其當作量刑的決定性因子，恐與罪刑法定原則有悖。其次，為了達到防衛社會與復歸社會之目的，都有可能以強制的方式為手段，但其間因目的的不同，在執行上所具有的指導作用，就會引導到不同的方向。以防衛社會安全為目的，則治療及協助精神患者適應或復歸社會就未必是其考慮的重點；以幫助其適應社會或復歸社會為目的，則所採取的方法就都必須是有助於達到此目的的方法才行。對於教化感受力低下之觸法精神病患，在矯治處遇上，與其以防衛社會安全為目的，毋寧以促使精神疾病患者適應社會或復歸社會為目的來得更具有正當性。
並列摘要
According to the intent of Article 57 of the Criminal Law, guilt is the decisive factor in sentencing, followed by the ten items listed in the same article that should be paid special attention to, and then followed by all other matters that should be considered. Since the legislator has made such an arrangement, when criminal justice applies the law, unless the law is unconstitutional, it should not violate the express intention of the legislator. From the provisions of Article 57 of the Criminal Law, it can be seen that the legislator did not expressly exemplify the possibility of civilization as a matter that should be paid special attention to in sentencing. Naturally, it should not be arbitrarily elevated from a general reference factor to a secondary factor, nor should it be elevated to a major decisive factor, otherwise it would be suspected of violating the principle of legality. Criminal judicial practice has greatly increased the importance of the possibility of civilization in sentencing, and even in cases involving the death penalty, it is deliberately regarded as a decisive factor in sentencing, which may be contrary to the principle of legality. Secondly, in order to achieve the purpose of defending society and returning to society, it is possible to use coercion as a means, but due to the difference in purpose, the guiding role in execution will lead to different directions. For the purpose of defending social security, the treatment and assistance of mental patients to adapt or reintegrate into society may not be the focus of their consideration; otherwise, for the purpose of helping them adapt to or reintegrate into society, the methods adopted must be conducive to achieving this goal. In the treatment for the mental patients, who broke the law, with low sensibility for enlightenment, Rather than the purpose of defending social security, the purpose of promoting mental illness patients to adapt to or reintegrate into society is more justifiable.