工程鑑定之證據能力與證明力之研究— 以瀝青混凝土鋪面工程鑽心取樣檢驗報告為例

刑事偵查與審判利用科學證據，如血跡、指紋及DNA等之鑑定結果，係能具體指明犯罪主體或構成要件之釐清，學界與實務界常見探討，工程鑑定則不然，工程依設計圖說施作為原則並配合現況調整，變更設計為常態，且鑑定結果或檢驗報告僅能就工程施作之部份事實或片段呈現，對於犯罪構成要件之待證事實，如廠商有無施用詐術之行為，縱可借助工程設計、監造、品管檢驗等實際參與者之證述，然檢察官與法官非工程實際參與者，採認工程鑑定結果並運用「論理法則及經驗法則」推論過程易誤認或遭誤導，致使真實發現困難，甚至有模糊爭點延宕訴訟進行。本文蒐集自民國95年起，因瀝青混凝土(下稱AC)鋪面道路工程偷工減料涉犯貪污治罪條例及刑法詐欺罪等有罪判決計19件，發現犯罪手法多以偷減路面鋪設AC厚度及道路鋪面未刨除即加鋪AC之偷減材料及工序等行為，然細繹判決書所列事實及法官得心證之理由，多仰賴被告自白，證人證述及通訊監察譯文等，或為訴訟經濟，檢察官即於偵查中予緩起訴處分，僅有筆者參與偵查案件5件係以勘驗現場鑽心取樣試體並送至檢驗單位出具報告，使用勘驗及鑑定為證明方法，然道路AC鋪面之施作，係層層加鋪之結果，故證據方法如僅仰賴供述證據，則就廠商實際施作厚度、有無銑刨原路面之事實，如何藉由勘驗與鑑定等證據方法認定廠商確有偷工減料以及相關不法所得，為本文重點。筆者以曾參與偵查與審理時接受交互詰問之經歷，依據公共工程委員會施工綱要規範AC鋪面等規定，研析各項證據資料經法院以嚴格證明法則審理後，如何以該基礎事實，運用論理法則及經驗法則，使法官建立心證認定廠商實際施作之AC厚度，而取得廠商是否施用詐術之證明力。另建議，偵查中勘驗與鑑定取得證據資料及其證據能力，於工程已不可回復原狀下，無法於審理中重新勘驗或鑑定時，我國對於證據保全規定，是否確實保障訴訟權利。文末以我國學者所探討德國法偵查法官制度，於偵查中藉由偵查法官參與檢察官實施勘驗、鑑定或訊問等職務協助行為，以提高偵查程序中所取得之證據於審判中適用之可能性，藉以保全證據，或可為參考。

關鍵字

瀝青混凝土；證據能力；證明力；鑑定；勘驗；偵查法官；證據保全

並列摘要

The identification results can specify the criminal subject or clarify the constitutional elements. This is commonly discussed in the academic and practical circles. The engineering appraisal is not the case. The engineering is based on the principle of design diagrams. And adjust with the current situation, change the design as normal, and the appraisal result or inspection report can only present part of the facts or fragments of the project implementation. The testimony of actual participants in engineering design, manufacturing supervision, quality control inspection, etc. However, the prosecutors and judges are not actual participants in the engineering. It is easy to be misunderstood or misled in the inference process by adopting the engineering appraisal results and using "theoretical rules and empirical rules". Fuzzy disputes delay litigation, let alone close to the truth. This article collects 19 cases of crimes of corruption and criminal law fraud in asphalt concrete (AC) paving road works since 2006, and found that most of the criminal methods were to secretly reduce the thickness of the pavement AC. Excluding the AC’s stealing and reducing materials and processes, and then carefully interpreting the facts listed in the judgment and the reason for the judge’s evidence, relying on the defendant’s confession, witness testimony, and communication monitoring translation, etc., or for litigation economy, the prosecutor That is, the punishment of prosecution was postponed during the investigation. The test samples were sampled and sent to the inspection unit to issue a report. The inspection and appraisal were used as the proof method, but the road AC pavement was implemented. It is also suggested that when the investigation and appraisal obtain evidence and its evidentiary capacity during the investigation, when the project cannot be restored to its original state and cannot be re-inspected or appraised during the trial, the author quotes whether my country’s evidence preservation regulations actually guarantee the right to litigation. My country’s scholars have explored the German law investigative judge system. In the investigation, the investigating judge participates in the prosecutor’s job assistance activities such as inquests or appraisals, so as to improve the possibility of the evidence obtained during the investigation process in the trial, so as to preserve the evidence , or can be used as a reference.