行政罰法中一行為不二罰原則適用之研究

The Research of No Double Jeopardy Clause of Administrative Penalty Act

鍾瑞蘭(Chung Jui-Lan)

指導教授 ： 蔡茂寅

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/國家發展研究所/碩士(2007年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2007.03383

摘要

中文摘要
按一行為不二罰原則乃係禁止國家對於人民之同一行為施以二次以上處罰之原則。在我國行政罰法公布施行前，有關行政罰法上一行為不二罰原則之適用，多依賴司法院大法官之解釋及實務判決之解釋運用。九十四年二月五日行政罰法公布，明文確立了行政處罰上之一行為不二罰原則，該法第二十四條及第二十六條明定數行政罰競合及刑事罰與行政罰競合之一行為不二罰原則，第三十一條及第三十二條並規定上開案件之管轄及處理程序，第二十七條則規定刑事罰與行政罰競合之裁處權時效之計算。
行政罰法將「一行為不二罰原則」明文納入規範，其真正之意涵及適用情形均有待釐清。此原則既名為「一行為不二罰」，因此「一行為」及「不二罰」二大區塊，即成為本文討論之主軸。本文分為六章撰寫，首先於第二章就一行為不二原則之起源及在我國法制發展之情形及法理依據先予探討，再以上開原則之探討結論為基礎，作為本文第三章至第五章處理行政罰法中有關一行為不二罰原則規定之論據，最後於第六章提出本文之結論與建議。
本文試透過一行為不二罰原則之法制發展及理論基礎之整理分析，尋求適於我國本土之一行為不二罰原則的適用範圍及方法，以避免行政機關產生適用之困難，致人民權益受損；並討論行政罰法相關規定之妥當性及其潛在問題，在可能產生問題發生前提出修法建議，期能透過現行實務之觀察，與理論結合，從實體面及程序面一併進行探討，並提出解決方法，以確保行政罰法立法時所持「依法行政」及「保障人權」之意旨。

關鍵字

一行為不二罰原則 ； 競合 ； 行為數 ； 刑事優先 ； 執行罰 ； 懲戒罰

並列摘要

Abstract
It is widely understood that “No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause” means nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb. Before the enactment of Administrative Penalty Act, the applications of “No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause” are mostly based on the interpretation of Grand Justices of Judicial Yuan and / or practical adjudication. When the Administrative Penalty Act was enacted and promulgated on Feb. 5, 2005, the principle of “No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause” on Same Act was established, Article 24 and Article 26 provided explicitly the “No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause” and the situations of concurrence of two or more administrative sanctions, the concurrence of criminal sanction and administrative sanction; and Article 31 & 32 also provided the jurisdiction and handling procedure for the above conditions; Article 27 provided the counting of timing in of adjudication of Criminal sanction and Administrative sanction.
The actual intention for and the application of incorporating “No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause” explicitly in Administrative Penalty Act is yet to be identify; however, since it is called “No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause” it is comprised of Double Sanction and Single Act, and they are the main components in this paper. This paper is divided into 6 chapters. In Chapter 2, the origin of “No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause” and the development in the legal system, as well as the theoretical basis were discussed. The conclusion of the above discussion was used as basis in the argument in Chanters 3 through 5 with regards the provision of “No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause” in Administrative Penalty Act. In Chapter 6, Conclusion of this paper and Suggestions were presented.
In this paper, the author tried to sort and analyze the development in legal system and theoretical basis of “No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause” and sought the applicable scope and method of this principle in local scenario to allow administrative institutions keeping from difficulty in application, which could lead to damage of interests of citizens. It covered also the adequacy of certain provision under Administrative Penalty Act and the potential problems, and suggesting amendment prior any problem coming to its being. Through the observation of the practical application and theoretical basis, in both facts and procedures, it is hoped that solutions may come out, so that the Administrative Penalty Act may maintain its position in Administration by the Law and Protection of Human Right.

並列關鍵字

No Double Sanctions Jeopardy Clause ； Concurrence ； Act count ； Criminal Priority ； Administration Sanction ； Discipline

參考文獻

18.林鈺雄，刑事訴訟法，自版，2003年9月，第3版。

1.余珊蓉，行政罰法基本問題之研究，台灣大學國家發展研究所碩士論文，94年7月。

2.吳文正，以性侵害犯罪防治法為中心探討刑事法學與精神醫學之交會與整合，台灣大學法律學研究所博士論文，2005年1月。

16.洪家殷，新行政罰法簡介，臺灣本土法學雜誌，第67期，2005年2月。

20.洪家殷，對營業人漏進、漏銷及逃漏營業稅之處罰－行政法院八十九年度判字第三六四號判決及司法院大法官釋字第五○三號評釋，臺灣本土法學雜誌，第21期，2001年4月。