非常上訴之實務演變與檢討

The Evolution and Review of Extraordinary Appeal Decisions

李春福(Chu-Fu Lee)

《法令月刊》 64卷8期 (2013/08) Pp. 86-106

https://doi.org/10.6509/TLM.201308_64(8).0005

摘要

我國就刑事確定判決之違誤，所設的特別救濟程序，採「雙軌制」，即針對原確定判決違背法令，而為統一解釋法令之「非常上訴」；與針對個案認定事實錯誤之確定判決，所設的「再審程序」。我國最高法院每年非常上訴判決之結案量，依司法院統計，近十年來平均每年約375件，而有居高不下之勢；反觀，與我國立法例相仿之日本，依日本最高裁判所統計，其非常上訴歷年來「受理及結案量」均為「個位數」，為何二國間之實務判決，竟相差百倍之餘，而引發本文之研究動機。因此，本文在深論「我國非常上訴判決之實務演變與檢討」，自宜從非常上訴制度之沿革、立法目的與本質，及二國間相關學說之比較與觀察，來檢視我國非常上訴判決之實務演變，包括對我國現行實務有重大影響、且深遠的大法官釋字第181號解釋、第238號解釋，及其97年第4次刑事庭決議採「必要性原則」等，並提出若干缺失與檢討，以期回歸非常上訴目的之本旨，方屬上策。

關鍵字

非常上訴 ； 判決違背法令 ； 訴訟程序違背法令 ； 必要性原則 ； 釋字第181號解釋 ； 釋字第238號解釋 ； 97年第4次刑事庭會議決議

並列摘要

With respect to a final criminal judgment that was found to be erroneous, the special reliefs are twofold, namely Extraordinary Appeal to unify the interpretation of laws and regulations at one hands and Retrial to remedy the final decision that was based on the mistaken facts findings of an offense on the other hand. Pursuant to the statistics of Judicial Yuan, the annual average number of granted cases of extraordinary appeal in Supreme Court is about 375, which appears relatively high and no trend to decline, in the past decade. In comparison with the same practice of Japan that has similar legislation, its annual average number of the filed and granted criminal cases of extraordinary appeal in Supreme Court is less than 10. The surprising case number difference on extraordinary appeal is interesting and hence inspired my study motive. Therefore, the approach of this study researches extraordinary appeal on aspect of the systematic development, legislation purpose and legal nature respectively. Subsequently to compare and to review the academic theory between the two states so as to trace the evolution history of extraordinary appeal decision in Taiwan. Those significant articles, which govern extraordinary appeal, including Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 181, Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 238 and the principle of necessity to file the Extraordinary Appeal decided in the 4th criminal court resolution on 2008 are examined as well. In the end, this study comes up with comments and recommendations and concluded that reverting to the purpose of extraordinary appeal remains the best solution.

並列關鍵字

extraordinary appeal ； unlawful judgment ； unlawful proceeding ； necessity principle ； Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 181 ； Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 238 ； the 4th Criminal Court Resolution (2008)

參考文獻

林永謀(1996)。關於非常上訴之刑訴法第447條第2項適用之檢討。萬國法律雙月刊。88

林鈺雄(2000)。被告缺席與非常上訴。台灣本土法學雜誌。14

呂潮澤(2010)。最高法院97年9月2日「關於非常上訴之補充決議」之適用性探討。法令月刊。61(11)

陳樸生(1990)。刑事訴訟法實務。自刊。

孫德耕(1976)。論大法官會議釋字第146號解釋。刑事法雜誌。20(5)