洗錢擴大利得沒收制度

Extended Confiscation of Criminal Proceeds Centered on Money Laundering

林鈺雄(Yu-Hsiung Lin)

《臺大法學論叢》 49卷2期 (2020/06) Pp. 779-817

https://doi.org/10.6199/NTULJ.202006_49(2).0006

摘要

擴大利得沒收，係指相較於一般利得沒收之獨立沒收型態。德國刑法於1992年後施行的沒收舊制即予引進（§ 73d StGB a.F.: Erweiterter Verfall），2017年7月1日起施行的沒收新制將其大幅修正；我國於2016年7月1日起施行的刑法沒收新制，並未引進擴大利得沒收制度，但於2017年6月28日起施行的洗錢防制法第18條第2項，首度引進擴大利得沒收制度，立法理由並揭示參考當時德國刑法第73d條、第261條等洗錢擴大利得沒收規定（包含集團性、常習性之要件）而制定，故德國舊制對於我國新法之解釋論，具有重要的參考價值。本文研究德國新、舊法及我國洗錢防制法新法之擴大利得沒收規定，分析：洗錢罪沒收與前置犯罪沒收的競合關係、洗錢罪本案沒收（洗錢防制法第18條第1項）與擴大利得沒收（同條第2項）之關係、財產來源不明罪與財產來源不明沒收之關係。結論認為：罰金不宜作為剝奪不法利得之手段；洗錢罪沒收並不阻礙優先發還前置犯罪之被害人；洗錢罪擴大利得沒收僅具補充性，本案沒收仍具有優先性；洗錢防制法第15條洗錢罪之本案沒收範圍，應予限縮；此外，關於財產來源不明之立法模式優劣，沒收模式應優於刑罰模式。

關鍵字

洗錢罪 ； 洗錢防制 ； 擴大利得沒收 ； 犯罪所得 ； 財產來源不明罪 ； 非刑事定罪沒收

並列摘要

Different from the general confiscation of criminal proceeds, the extended confiscation is an independent type of confiscation, which has been provided in German Criminal Code § 73d since 1992 and was substantially amended by the new Criminal Confiscation Law in 2017. Nonetheless, we haven’t introduced the same system as Germany’s to our Criminal Code. Although our confiscation law was amended in 2016, it was not until 2017 that the concept of extended confiscation was adopted for the first time in our Money Laundering Control Act § 18 II. According to the legislative explanation, the provision is mainly based on German Criminal Code § 73d and § 261, which are regulations of extended confiscation concerning money laundering in German Criminal Law (including conditions of organized group and frequent basis), therefore, the interpretation of the German Criminal Code is of great value. This article centered on the extended confiscation provisions in both German Criminal Code and Taiwanese Money Laundering Control Act, and attempts to analyze the relationship between the confiscation of money laundering and specified unlawful activity, compare the application of the general confiscation with the extended confiscation of money laundering, and also deal with the property crimes of unknown origin and its confiscation. Conclusions of this article listed as follow: Firstly, fine shall not be served as method of depriving criminal proceeds; secondly, the confiscation of money laundering will not interfere with the claim for the returning proceeds of victims of specified unlawful activity; thirdly, compared to the general confiscation of money laundering which owns priority, the extended confiscation merely possesses complementary feature; fourthly, the application of the general confiscation in the Money Laundering Control Act § 15 shall be limited; and lastly, the legislative proposal of property crimes of unknown origin shall adopt the means of criminal proceeds confiscation rather than penalty.

並列關鍵字

money laundering ； money laundering control ； extended confiscation ； confiscation of criminal proceeds ； Property crimes of unknown origin ； non-conviction-based confiscation(NCBC)

參考文獻

王士帆（2018），〈2017年德國犯罪所得沒收新法：擴大沒收與第三人沒收〉，收於：法務部司法官學院（編），《刑事政策與犯罪研究論文集（21）》，頁1-24，臺北：法務部司法官學院。

林明昕（2016），〈論不法利得之剝奪：以行政罰法為中心〉，《臺大法學論叢》，45卷3期，頁755-825。

黃彥翔（2017），《論犯罪所得沒收》，國立臺灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文（未出版），臺北。

薛智仁（2015），〈犯罪所得沒收制度之新典範？評析食安法第四十九條之一之修正〉，《臺大法學論叢》，44卷特刊，頁1327-1394。

薛智仁（2018），〈刑事沒收制度之現代化：2015年沒收實體法之立法疑義〉，《臺大法學論叢》，47卷3期，頁1053-1123。