一事不再理之探討

A Study on the Doctrine of Res Judicata

李春福(Chun-Fu Lee)

《高大法學論叢》 15卷1期 (2019/09) Pp. 155-191

摘要

「一事不再理」是刑事法中一項重要原則，其含義是一個人不能以同一行為或同一罪名受到兩次或多次審判或處罰。歐洲大陸法系國家由於各國的語言不同，大都採用拉丁文的「ne bis in idem」字詞呈現；惟真正將「一事不再理」原則，置入於成文法典中，乃首見於法國1808年《刑事訴訟法》第360條明確規定「在法律上宣告無罪之人，不應再次舉行或對相同問題之爭執。」因而，成為刑事訴訟法上一大原則，於焉確立。我國實務與學者通說認為「一事不再理」，係刑事訴訟法上之基本原則，乃側重在實體效力，故法院在作出有罪、無罪等實體確定判決，若就該同一案件重行起訴者，則依刑事訴訟法第302條第1款「曾經判決確定者」，應諭知免訴之判決；但若法院作出形式上之程序裁判，例如管轄錯誤、不受理或不合法之駁回判決，則不適用「一事不再理」原則。惟今年（2019）2月22日司法院釋字第775號解釋，則已進一步將「一事不再理」原則，提升為憲法位階效力，與現代法治國普世公認的憲法原則接軌。是此，本文乃基於上開解釋文，引發就「一事不再理」的探討，而先從大陸法系與英美法系等二大法系，就「一事不再理」與「雙重危險」之性質及有無區別之實益，予以論述；次就「一事不再理」與非常上訴有無關係予以探討；進而就「一事不再理」在刑事訴訟各程序法上，例如在偵查中、既判力範圍、與撤回上訴程序效力等等，而為論述與剖析。

關鍵字

一事不再理 ； 雙重危險 ； 非常上訴 ； 既判力範圍 ； 最高法院 ； 撤回上訴

並列摘要

The doctrine of res judicata, a major principle of the Criminal Procedure Code, means a person ought not to be trial or punished twice or several times against the same behavior or crime. Civil law countries used the Latin terms of ＂ne bis in idem＂ due todifferent languages. In 1808, the doctrine of res judicata was first time legislated into the statutory laws in the Article 380 of French Criminal Procedure Code cited as ＂a person lawfully declared not guilty ought not to be indicted again or initiated the same question.＂ Therefore, it became the major principle of the Criminal Procedure Code since then. Local opinion in practice and scholars' common views believe that the doctrine of res judicata has an outstanding meritorious effect. For instance, when the Court had made a judgment on the merits to be guilty or not guilty, if the person was indicted again on the same case, Judgment of ＂Exempt from Prosecution＂ shall be pronounced as a final judgment has already been given, pursuant to the Article 302.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code. In the event the Court made a procedural judgement including Mistake in Jurisdiction, Case Not Entertained, overrule an appeal solely based on some procedural error etc., the principle of res judicata would be inapplicable. It's noteworthy that Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.775 on 2019 February 22 had further promoted the doctrine of res judicata onto the constitutional level and link with the universal constitutional principle in modern rule of law. Hence, the approach of this study, based on the abovementioned Judicial Yuan Interpretation, to initiate the discussion on the doctrine of res judicata, then to search the nature and difference of res judicata and double jeopardy in Civil law and Common law system respectively. Further, to explore the connection of res judicata with extraordinary appeal. Furthermore, to analyze and discuss the legal effect of res judicata in the individual proceedings of the Criminal Procedure Code, including under the investigation, coverage of final judgment, the procedural effect to withdraw the appeal.

並列關鍵字

res judicata ； double jeopardy ； extraordinary appeal ； coverage of final judgment ； Supreme Court ； withdraw the appeal

參考文獻

王兆鵬（2008）。《一事不再理》。台北：元照。

呂潮澤（2001）。〈我國刑事法律審制度之檢討〉，《司法研究年報第21 輯第 10 篇》。台北：司法院秘書處。

林超駿（2010）。〈初論速審法限制檢方對無罪案件之上訴一美國刑事不對稱上訴法制簡介〉，《司法周刊》，1503 期，頁 2-3。

林鈺雄（2017）。《刑事訴訟法（下冊）》，修訂八版。台北：新學林。

陳樸生（1990）。《刑事訴訟法實務》，再版。台北：作者自版。