刑罰上與行政罰上一行為之研究

The Research on a Single Act of the Criminal Penalty and the Administrative Penalty

詹凱傑(Kai-Chieh Chan)

指導教授 ： 鄭善印

中原大學/商學院/財經法律研究所/碩士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/cycu200901031

摘要

我國刑法於94年修正刪除牽連犯、連續犯之規定，對於以往論以該等規定之案例應如何處理，修正理由中為避免刑罰過當，而具體指出可行之方向，即分別應用「接續犯」、「包括的一罪」或「想像競合犯」之方式來處理，如此仍不超脫出對於「一行為」與「數行為」之判斷問題。但藉由整理判決後可看出，我國實務界似乎並未如修正理由所引導之方法來處理該等類型之案例，而仍尚處於摸索階段。另外，我國行政罰法第24條亦有「一行為」之法文，故在適用該條文時，仍會發生與刑法上相同之問題：一行為和數行為如何判斷、標準何在？此不僅在行政法學說上見解歧異，實務上之認定亦未見統一。
而在「一行為」之判斷，於刑罰領域中，德國學理上發展有所謂之「行為單、複數理論」，而為我國學者繼受之，但除了有肯認該理論之重要性外，仍有學者抱持著懷疑之態度，而提出個人之意見。另外，我國傳統實務深受日本之影響，而採取日本學界所發展之「罪數理論」體系，因而，在我國存在著兩套不同之理論，導致對於相關問題之探討與研究，產生許多複雜之問題。另外，學說上對於行政罰上「一行為」之認定，有偏向刑法理論，亦有著重於行政罰上之特殊性，而採取不同之判斷標準，另在行政實務見解大致上亦可分成該兩類。而經過評析與討論後，該兩類認定標準，各有各自之優缺點。
基於上述的背景認知，行為數的探討與研究雖屬相對困難，但本文認為檢討行為數的認定基準，實為刑法、行政罰法上的重要課題之一，蓋因行為數的認定，涉及刑法上競合理論之前提性問題，尤其刑法修正刪除牽連犯與連續犯之規定後，該等問題更為重要，另在行政罰上，亦是落實憲法上所要求之「一行為不二罰原則」之關鍵前提之一。因此，在一行為的認定上，如何避免恣意，是成功建構一套合適的一行為的處罰體系的關鍵因素，而此亦為本論文主要探討的主題。

關鍵字

行為單數 ； 行為複數 ； 一行為 ； 想像競合犯 ； 刑罰 ； 行政罰

並列摘要

The Criminal Law of the Republic of China deleted stipulation which related to implicated Offence and Continuous Offenses in 2005. In order to avoid excessive penalty in dealing with the case that judged about this in the past, the Amended Reason specifically pointed out the feasible scheme which separately applied and processed with "Follow-up Offenses", "An Incorporative Offense" or "Ideal Concurrence of Offenses." This was not apart from the issue of "Single Act" and "Several Acts". However, we couldn’t see that the practice (did) deal with these types of cases as the Amended Reason’s way by summarizing past judgement, and it is still in the stage of exploration. In addition, the word "Single Act" shows up in article 24 of the Administrative Penalty Act of the Republic of China, therefore how to determine the standard of Single Act and Several Acts occurs when we apply this article in the Criminal Law. About administrative law, there are not only different opinions between scholars but various disagreement in pratice.
In the area of criminal penalty, Germany's academia developed a theory called " Theory of Singular and Plural behavior", which is recommended by Republic of China’s scholars, as a judge of "Single Act" . However, some scholars still held suspected attitude toward it and advanced personal opinions though some scholars recognize the importance of the theory. In addition, being impacted by Japan, Republic of China’s traditional practice accepted the "Theory of Criminal Quantity" system which was developed by Japanese scholars. Accordingly, there were two different sets of theories in our country, which caused many problems when we explored and researched about the relevant issues. Besides, the doctrine also took different standards when judging Single Act of administrative penalty. Some focused on the theory of Criminal Law while others on the particularity of the administrative penalty. Generally, the administrative practice could be divided into two types. After analysis and discussion, the two types of standards had its own advantages and disadvantages.
Based on the above background and perception, it’s difficult to study Act Quantity. However, it’s a very important subject to determine the standard of Act Quantity in the Criminal Law and the Administrative Penalty Act because it relates to the premise of Theory of Criminal Concurrence. After the Criminal Law deleted stipulation which related to Implicated Offence and Continuous Offenses, the issue becomes even more important. In the administrative penalty, it’s also one of the key premise to implement "Principle of Double Jeopardy", which is demanded by the Constitution. Therefore, in determination of Single Act, how to avoid recklessness is a key point to construct a suitable punishment system successfully. And this is the emphasis of this thesis.

並列關鍵字

Plural Behavior ； Ideal Concurrence of Offenses ； Administrative Penalty ； Criminal Penalty ； Single Act ； Singular Behavior

參考文獻

16. 陳文貴，從行政罰法看行政不法與刑事不法之交錯，法令月刊，第58卷第11期，頁36-51(2007)。

25. 劉建宏，大法官釋字第604號解釋之研究─行政罰法上「單一行為」概念之探討，臺北大學法學論叢，第64期，頁1-23(2007)。

1. 吳金芳，論連續犯、牽連犯、常業犯規定廢除後之論罪科刑-兼論實務與學說，國立臺灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文(2008)。

3. 黃義偉，行政法上一行為不二罰原則理論與實務之研究，國立台北大學法律學系研究所碩士論文(2009)。

4. 蔡孟謙，包括一罪之理論與實踐，國立台北大學法律學系研究所碩士論文(2008)。