使公務員登載不實罪之刑法釋義 -以土地登記為中心

本文主旨研究「使公務人員登載不實罪」在刑法上之釋義，以過往實際判例中對該罪之詮釋作為開端，綜合討論各學說與司法實務的見解，比對行政法與刑法對該罪釋義互有矛盾之處，並與該罪相關其他領域融入不同領域之專業，追溯該罪設立之本質意義，竭力尋找最符合刑法意旨且最貼近實務狀況的論述模式，以期能為我國法制體制更臻完善的道路做出貢獻。罪刑乃是為保護特定法益而存在。而為確保公文書的保證機能與證明功能而存在的「使公務人員登載不實罪」是為偽造文書罪之一種，承載著保護公共信用與財產法益的法學重量。文書在法制體制具有舉足輕重之地位，乃是穩定近代工商社會運作之基礎，絕不容輕忽，這也是偽造文書罪存在的理由。至於文書之定義、意涵和審查方式，以及偽造文書罪的類型與構成要件，將於本文第二章申論之。在73年台上字第1710號判例中對「使公務人員登載不實罪」與「實質審查」之關聯，實與定義「使公務人員登載不實罪」的刑法第214條條文內容有所出入。條文中並無隻字關於「實質審查」，上列判例如此解釋，除有郢書燕說之虞，更有違背刑法最基本原則「罪刑法定主義」之疑慮；這項疑慮亦是本文討論的焦點之一，將在第三章詳言之。而在第三章中，也將透過法院評價與案例分析的比對，一窺不同的文書審查形式（即實質審查與形式審查），並接續至第四章討論登記制度與公文書形成之關係，徹底了解「使公務人員登載不實罪」所欲保護之公共信用法益形成過程，探求「使公務人員登載不實罪」在行政法上與刑法上、法學理論上與實務操作上之不同詮釋，以作為罪刑與構成要件申論之基礎。　　刑法定義「偽造文書」的篇章中，多次使用「足以生」作為犯罪行為的依據，包括「使公務人員登載不實罪」在內。究竟「足以生」的立法旨趣為何，即是本文第五章討論的重點。第五章中思考並檢討「抽象危險犯」、「具體危險犯」、「結果犯」與「適性犯」的定義與實質內涵，以解答條文中「足以生」的真正意義，並嘗試回應本文中提出之多項疑慮，尋找最適合「使公務人員登載不實罪」的具體改善方針。本文經過法學理論的論證與實務見解的輔助，研究國內關於「使公務人員登載不實罪」制度面與執行面之現況，以期能提出實質之建議與檢討。

關鍵字

使公務員登載不實；適性犯；危險犯；結果犯；實質審查

並列摘要

This research focuses on ‘’the offence of causing public officials to make false entry’’ in Criminal Code of Republic of China. The research starts with the interpretation of such crime in previous precedents, followed by the discussion of the point views from distinct legal schools and the contradiction between the administrative law and Criminal Code. The perspectives from other professional fields are taken into account as well. We hope to figure out the true meaning of this crime, striving to seek the discourse which is close to the intention of Criminal Code while operating practically. We expect to dedicate this research to making the law system of our nation better. The existence of penalty aims to protect specific law interest, whereas ‘’the offence of causing public officials to make false entry’’ whose target is to ensure the reliability of official document is a sort of the offence of forgery, which protects the law interest of public credit and property. Document plays a significant role in the law system, which is also the foundation of the modern business society. Therefore, the importance of document cannot be overemphasized, which is the intention of the offence of forgery. As for the definition, meaning and examination of document as well as the sorts and elements of the offence of forgery are discussed in detail in Chapter 2. The connection between ‘’the offence of causing public officials to make false entry’’ and ‘’substantial examination’’ is mentioned in the previous precedent; nevertheless, there is no word concerning ‘’substantial examination’’ in article 214 in Criminal Law of Republic of China, which is the article defining ‘’the offence of causing public officials to make false entry’’. Whether the precedent over interpreted the article or even violated the principle of legality(no penalty without law) is the main idea of Chapter 3. Additionally, in Chapter 3, we outline the category of examination of document (substantial or formal) by comparing the review from the judges and the analysis of different cases, followed by the association between registration and the formation of official document, completely going through the process of the formation of the law interest of public credit. This step is to figure out the interpretations on the legal side, the administrative side and the practical side of this offence, in order to discuss the elements of the offence in Chapter 5. In the article regarding the offence the forgery, the word ‘’cause’’ are used to define whether an individual commit a crime or not, including ‘’the offence of causing public officials to make false entry’’. What ‘’cause’’ actually means is the highlight of Chapter 5. In Chapter 5, we will consider and introspect what are ‘’abstract danger crime’’, ‘’concrete danger crime’’, ‘’aptitude crime’’, and ‘’objective offence’’ to explain the word ‘’cause’’ in the article and answer the problems mentioned this research, expecting to figure out a realistic improvement of ‘’the offence of causing public officials to make false entry’’. This study examines the systematic side and practical side of ‘’the offence of causing public officials to make false entry’’ on the basis of law theories and physical point views, hoping to propose concrete suggestions and reviews.