第二審上訴之研究～以司法院第二審上訴草案為中心

Research on the second instance of appeal- Focusing on the study of the second trial system of the Judicial Yuan

蔡婷婷(Ting-Ting Tsai)

指導教授 ： 柯耀程

國立中正大學/法學院/法律學系/碩士(2013年)

摘要

關於刑事訴訟第二審構造，於立法例上，向有覆審制、續審制、事後審制三種。我國刑事訴訟法一向受大陸法系影響甚深，尤其以職權主義之觀念甚為深遠，著重發現真實。因此第二審構造上乃與大陸法系相同，採覆審制。於此制度下，上訴人上訴後，第二審法院亦需為完全重複之審理。因而此種採取構造之上訴制度將造成當事人與辯護人過度輕忽第一審，且同時對第二審法院造成莫大負擔，更會給予訴訟關係人有湮滅、偽造、變造證據或串證之可能，進而對發現真實之刑事訴訟目的有所妨礙。且在未實施失權效制度下，第二審一味重複調查事實之現況，亦與訴訟經濟之目的有所遠離。2007年7月4日雖修正刑事訴訟法第361條第2項第3項及第367條，上訴書狀需記載具體上訴理由，有稍解濫行上訴之弊，但是否可擷取事後審查審之精神，仍有待觀察。因此，是否捨棄現行「覆審制」之上訴制度，改採「事後審」制度之討論實為必要。
本文從概述刑事訴訟第二審上訴之功能開始探討，論及第二審上訴制度之架構，並討論此三種制度之立法目的、優劣，以供檢視司法院第二審上訴草案之參考。再探討各國刑事訴訟上訴二審之構造，藉他國之法制探求本國第二審修法之妥適性，之後藉著實證統計資料及經驗分析，探討我國刑事訴訟上訴審構造，指出現行第二審面臨之問題。接著針對司法院刑事訴訟上訴審條文修正草案中與第二審上訴有關部分，加以一一探討，嘗試剖析草案改採事後審之利弊，並探討草案修正之利弊得失及提出修法建議，以供刑事第二審上訴修正之參考。

關鍵字：上訴、審級構造、覆審制、續審制、事後審制

關鍵字

事後審制 ； 續審制 ； 覆審制 ； 審級構造 ； 上訴

並列摘要

Considering the structure of the criminal procedure of second instance, under legislative (law) case, there are three types of trial systems, being 'trial de novo', 'continuative trial by higher tribunal', and 'revision'. Criminal procedure law has been deeply influenced by civil law, particularly on the concept of a very profound doctrine, which focuses on real discovery. As a result of the structure of the criminal procedure of the second instance being nearly identical to the civil law, it has adopted the system of review. Under this procedure, if the appellants appeal, the court of second instance must reiterate the full and complete trial. Thus the appeal of the system will disregard the results of the first trial considering the client and defendant. Which will result in a greater burden on the second trial, and may allow an opportunity for the client to destroy, forge, tamper with the evidence, and/or the witness, which may in turn, create false truths. Thus, the second trial conducted by the system will be required to redo all procedures and will result in actions deemed unnecessary and a waste of resources. As of July 4th, 2007, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 361, Section 3, Section 2, and Section 367, if the client wishes to appeal to court, he/she must produce sufficient evidence and/or solid reasoning to appeal to the court. So if the current system of 'trial de novo' shall be reconsidered into being modified into 'revision', this adjustment must be discussed in a serious matter, and must take into consideration consequences and repercussions of this action.
This paper summarizes the function of Criminal Appeals, as it begins to explore the second instance, deals with the structure of the second instance appeal system, and discusses the legislative purpose of these three systems. Along with the advantages and disadvantages of these following actions, the Judicial Yuan second instance appeals for review of draft reference. Criminal Appeals will explore the country's second trial structure, by his own country's legal system, to explore the second instance's appropriateness of amending this law, followed by empirical statistics and empirical analysis to explore the structure of criminal appellate proceedings, noting that the current problems faced by the second instance . Then the Judicial Criminal Appellate drafts amendments to the relevant part of the appeal with the second instance, to look into all, try to shift to post-draft analysis of the pros and cons of the trial, and discusses the pros and cons of the draft amendments proposed as to amending the law and recommendations for criminal second instance appeals amended reference

並列關鍵字

Trial de novo ； The structure of trial system ； Right to appea ； Continuative Trial by Higher Tribuna ； Revision

參考文獻

3.王兆鵬，刑事訴訟法講義，元照，5版，2010年9月。

10.黃東熊、吳景芳，刑事訴訟法論，三民，2001年10月。

11.黃朝義，刑事訴訟法（制度篇），元照，2002年年8月。

4.全國司法改革會議十週年座談會系列（二）—刑事第二審之定位發言記錄，台灣法學雜誌，164期，2010年11月。

8.林永謀，審級制度與刑事之上訴，法令月刊，40卷3期，1989年3月。