刑事審判範圍的迷思與反思

刑事訴訟乃實現國家刑罰權之程序。然而，長期以來，刑罰權對象為何？均係以案件之單一性與同一性作為依據。在經過法制沿革之比較考察後，不難發現，我國傳統實務從清末開始即深受日本法制發展的影響，但在戰後日本法制受到美國影響大幅變革之際，我國實務卻繼續因襲日本戰前舊制，在單一刑罰權概念下施行糾問式的刑事訴訟。而於釐清傳統實務背後之糾問因子後，本文主張應以權力分立為基礎決定審判範圍，並以一事不再理為界線。此外，如能於傳統既判力判斷上增加全體事實業經審判之條件，應可解決我國傳統實務所面臨之爭議。

關鍵字

同一性案件；一事不再理；既判力；起訴範圍；牽連犯；連續犯

並列摘要

A criminal proceeding is a procedure by which the power of criminal punishment of the State may be enforced. However, what the object of such punishing power would be has long relied on the concept of the unit and identity of case. After reviewing the history of criminal procedure law compared to its counterpart in Japan, the related legal development has deeply been influenced by Japan since the era of late Ching dynasty. However, while the Japanese criminal justice system was drastically changed by the United States immediately after World War II, the ROC counterpart has remained its pre-war inquisitorial tradition mainly based on the old fashion concept of the unit and identity of case. This study claims, after identifying the inquisitorial element behind the pre-war justice system, that the scope of trial should be determined on the principle of Separation of Power, and should be subject to the principle of the Double Jeopardy. In addition, there will be no practical problem if res judicata could be conditioned on trying all facts in a single punishment case.