論提供人頭帳戶之法理問題 --以行為人主觀犯意為討論中心

On the Legal Issues of Dummy Account —A Debate over the Defendant’s Intention

張富鈞(Fu-Chun Chang)

指導教授 ： 莊世同

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系/碩士(2009年)

摘要

在我國因金融機構林立，民眾開立帳戶亦十分便利，金融機構為了拓展業務，對於開立帳戶者多來者不拒，開立帳戶之門檻極低，因此造成國人平均每人有三至四個帳戶之情形，因國人對於金融信用並不重視，加上詐騙犯罪盛行，詐騙集團常以蠅頭小利引誘民眾提供帳戶。然而，因此種行為態樣與傳統刑事犯罪型態並不相同，提供帳戶之行為人對於收集帳戶之人日後將拿其提供之帳戶作何用途，並無「明確的」、「特定的」瞭解，此時裁判者在判斷其主觀上有無故意的認定以及幫助犯意的認定時，便顯得困難。而且在行為人於提供帳戶與不法犯罪集團時，其主觀上是否該當了刑法上的「故意」要件，亦非如此理所當然。諸如此類的問題，讓提供帳戶之行為在法律上評價容有許多的爭議，存在許多值得加以探討之問題，顯然已經衝擊刑法最根本之罪刑法定主義的根基。

第二章主要介紹現今不法犯罪集團利用人頭帳戶之情形，就不法犯罪集團如何利用人頭帳戶作為犯罪之工具，並且就其可能涉犯的法律責任如何評價加以說明，藉以瞭解人頭帳戶在國內之犯罪及論罪之情形。另外，針對日新月異的多元詐騙手法加以介紹，並簡介美日等國對於提供帳戶行為之法律規範及遏止此等歪風之手段及政策。

第三章則就我國實務上對於提供帳戶之論罪及適用法律爭議加以說明。就提供人頭帳戶與詐欺集團使用之實務判決情形加以觀察，究竟是否成立犯罪？而倘若成立犯罪，則係違反洗錢防制法或幫助詐欺罪？另外，亦對於現今詐欺集團之收集帳戶手法之新興手法，如以「應徵工作」或「申辦貸款」之名義要求行為人提供之帳戶情形，實務上究竟又如何評斷此類型之提供者之法律責任見解加以介紹。

第四章部分則嘗試以法學方法論的角度來探討，以「概念」與「類型」之區辨方式，就提供帳戶之法律責任應如何評價？實務上認定該當幫助詐欺（或恐嚇取財）犯行之見解是否全無疑義？在法理上之適用有無疑問？並就現今之規範部分，指出實務上認定事實之舉證困難及適用法律分歧等問題，並從立法論之觀點，建議就人頭帳戶之管制應另立專法規範，以杜紛爭。

關鍵字

詐欺 ； 人頭帳戶 ； 未必故意 ； 法學方法論

並列摘要

Due to the prosperous establishment of financial institutions in our country, it is very convenient for the citizens to open accounts. In order to develop their business activities, financial institutions will often accept most of those who want to open accounts, and the standard for opening such accounts is extremely low. Therefore, there is an average of three to four accounts for each person in the country, indicating that the citizens do not regard the issue of financial credit as important. Coupled with the prevalence of criminal activities involving fraud, fraud groups frequently use little benefit to lure citizens into providing their accounts. However, this type of behavior is different from the traditional type of criminal activity. Those who provide their accounts to the collector of such information do not have a “certain” or “particular” understanding on the purpose or further use of such accounts. Therefore, it will be difficult when judging whether such activity was committed with intent, as well as deciding the existence of criminal intent. In addition, it is hard to be absolute in determining whether the act of providing accounts to the criminal groups establishes the “intent” in criminal law from an objective point of view. Such questions have left ample space for numerous disputes involving the act of providing accounts. There still exist many issues that are worthy of discussion, and it is obvious that the foundation of criminal law’s concept of legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime has been challenged.

Chapter two will introduce the circumstances surrounding present criminal groups in using dummy accounts, particularly on how criminal groups use dummy accounts as a tool in criminal activities. The chapter will also provide an explanation on the evaluation of the possible legal obligations that will be involved, while gaining insight into the criminal activities involving dummy accounts in the country and the legal punishment. In addition, there will be an introduction to the new methods used in fraud which seem to be evolving with each passing day. There will also be brief introduction in the legal regulations on the provision of accounts in US and Japan, as well as the measures and policies utilized to deter such criminal activities.

Chapter three is the explanation on what is considered as an offence and the applicable laws in practice for the provision of accounts in our country. This shall be accomplished by observing the judgment on the provision of dummy accounts and the actual use of such dummy accounts by fraud groups to determine whether a criminal act can be established. In addition, there shall also be introduction on the present and innovative methods used by fraud groups to collect accounts, such as requesting a party to provide an account in order to “apply for a job” or “apply for loans”, and how to evaluate and determine the legal obligations attached to the account providers described above in practice.

Chapter four will attempt to use the point of view from the methodology of jurisprudence to discuss the evaluation on the legal obligations attached to such account providers by distinguishing between the method of “concept” and “type”. Is it completely doubtless to identify and regard the account providers as assisting in the act of fraud (or obtaining property by threat) in practice? Are there issues surrounding the applicability of legal principle to such cases? This chapter will also point out the difficulties in identifying facts as evidence and the diversity in applicable laws from the present regulations, and will advice to promulgate specific regulations for the control of dummy accounts from a legislative point of view to deter any dispute.

並列關鍵字

Fraud ； Dummy account ； Legal methodology

參考文獻

鄭善印，〈人頭帳戶刑責之研究〉，《警察法學》，第5期，第245頁以下，2006年10月。

黃榮堅，〈財產犯罪與不法所有意圖〉，《臺灣本土法學雜誌》，第25期，第112頁以下，2001年8月。

Buchanan, Bonnie (2004), 〈Money Laundering: A Global Obstacle〉, 《Research in International Business and Finance》, No. 18, pp. 115-127.

參考書目

中文資料