誤想防衛與誤想防衛過當之研究

A Study of Putative Self-Defense and Excessive Putative Self-Defense

李維中(Wei-Chung Lee)

指導教授 ： 甘添貴

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系一般生組/碩士(2015年)

摘要

所謂「誤想防衛」，一般均指雖無現在不法侵害存在，然行為人卻誤認有此狀態存在而加以反擊之情形。此一情形於刑法上究應如何處理及評價，一直以來均爭論不休。究其緣由，除法無明文外，實可謂與論者間對於刑法上相關前提理論－如犯罪論體系、違法性本質、故意之體系地位等見解之不同有關。因此，與其僅著眼於關於「誤想防衛」各種見解結論上之差異，不如考慮由相關前提理論之檢討著手，或許較易釐清爭議之根本。
又倘「誤想防衛」與「防衛過當」發生競合時，亦即所謂「誤想防衛過當」之情況下究應如何處理，亦為刑法理論上之難題。此一議題非惟關涉對於「誤想防衛」及「防衛過當」之定義及類型劃分，更涉及前述有關「誤想防衛」之處理以及「防衛過當」得減免刑罰之依據等問題，故於處理上亦迭生爭議。
因此，為了對上開問題進行探討，本文擬先就處理誤想防衛之前提基礎議題－如犯罪論體系、違法性本質及故意之體系地位等問題進行檢討，待確立基礎理論之框架後，再回頭檢視於犯罪論體系各階層處理「誤想防衛」此一問題之可行性，以尋找與本文所採基礎理論相一致之見解。與此同時，本文並將嘗試重新界定「誤想防衛」與「防衛過當」此二概念之意義及範圍，以進一步劃定「誤想防衛過當」之範疇；此外，亦將探討於欠缺不法侵害存在之情形下，是否仍有適用「防衛過當」法律效果之可能。最後，以上述確立之諸觀點為基礎，提出本文對於「誤想防衛過當」處理之淺見。期望能藉此討論過程，對於「誤想防衛」與「誤想防衛過當」問題之處理及未來學說上之研究稍有助益。

關鍵字

違法性理論 ； 防衛過當 ； 誤想防衛過當 ； 誤想防衛 ； 正當防衛 ； 故意之體系地位 ； 犯罪論體系

並列摘要

The term “Putative Self-Defense” generally refers to a situation where, a person mistakenly believes he or she is facing an immediate unlawful aggression and takes a defensive action, despite the fact that such aggression is inexistent. Handling such situations in criminal law has long been a controversial issue. In addition to the lack of explicit provisions in the law, the controversy arises from the different opinions relating to the basic theories of criminal law, such as the criminal theory system, the illegality theory, and the legal status of intention in criminal theory system. Therefore, rather than focusing on the discussion of “Putative Self-Defense”, much attention should be given to study and understand those basic theories in order to clarify the root of such controversy.
If “Putative Self-Defense” and “Excessive Self-Defense” occur concurrently, which known as “Excessive Putative Self-Defense”, handling such situation can also become a problem in criminal law. The problem involves defining the scopes of “Putative Self-Defense” and “Excessive Self-Defense”, managing the situations in “Putative Self-Defense”, and understanding the legal basis of reducing or remitting the punishment for “Excessive Self-Defense”. Thus, solving the problem is often debatable.
In order to address those problems, the study will first discuss the basic theories of criminal law, such as the criminal theory system, the illegality theory, and the legal status of intention in criminal theory system. After establishing a basic framework of those basic theories, the study will review the feasibility of the different approaches in handling “Putative Self-Defense”, and attempt to find a solution consistent with those basic theories. Then, the study will redefine the scopes and the concepts of “Putative Self-Defense” and “Excessive Self-Defense” in order to further define the concept of “Excessive Putative Self-Defense”. Furthermore, the study will discuss the feasibility of applying the legal effect of “Excessive Self-Defense” when an unlawful aggression is inexistent. Finally, based on the aforementioned perspectives, the study will propose a solution to handle cases in ”Excessive Putative Self-Defense”. Through the discussion, the study hopes to provide an insight into settling some of the issues in “Putative Self-Defense” and “Excessive Putative Self-Defense”, as well as providing a basic framework for future studies.

並列關鍵字

Legal Status of Intention in Criminal Theory System ； Illegality Theory ； Excessive Self-Defense ； Excessive Putative Self-Defense ； Putative Self-Defense ； Self-Defense ； Criminal Theory System

參考文獻

陳志龍，許可性構成要件錯誤─兼論負面構成要件要素理論，國立臺灣大學法學論叢，20卷1期，頁205-253，1990年12月。

黃榮堅，刑法解題－關於不法意識及犯罪結構，國立臺灣大學法學論叢，21卷1期，頁171-206，1991年12月。

黃榮堅，故意的定義與定位，國立臺灣大學法學論叢，28卷1期，頁123-16 5，1998年10月。

黃榮堅，論正當防衛，國立臺灣大學法學論叢，24卷2期，頁301-325，1995年6月。

王安異，穿越價值哲學--韋爾策爾（Welzel）之人本刑法思想研究，政大法學評論，108期，頁1-62，2009年4月。