未成年人合意性交罪之實證研究－以司法人員承辦刑法第227條案件經驗為例

An Empirical Study of Young and Innocent Sexual Offender: Results From the Judicial Personnel's Experience in Applying Article 227 of Criminal Law

林俊杰(Chun-Chieh Lin)

《青少年犯罪防治研究期刊》 9卷2期 (2018/01) Pp. 1-56

https://doi.org/10.29751/JRDP.201801_9(2).0001

摘要

目前刑法第227條之規定旨在保護青少年之身心發展，但法條構成要件過於僵化且無彈性，導致實務運作上適用結果弊多於利。本文以刑法第227條為研究主題，採取質化訪談研究方式，以現職法官、檢察官及律師各1名為訪談對象，訪談面向包括︰透過刑罰能否有效達到立法目的？有無維持刑事處罰之必要性？現行法條有無檢討必要？被害人不願提告時，應否限縮法定代理人之獨立告訴權？經彙整受訪者訪談意見，受訪者多認為透過刑罰似乎很難達到本條欲保護未成年人身心健康的目的，且衍生諸多問題，包括兩代提告與否往往意見不一、被告舉證困難等等。大多數被害人均具有相當之判斷能力，刑罰並非解決此類問題之唯一方式，建議搭配相關之行政管理措施。基於保護未成年人身心健康之考量，仍不宜貿然全面除罪化。法條對於被害人年齡部分，建議可改採未滿12歲、12歲以上未滿16歲為區分標準，並調整刑度上下限，增加法官量刑之彈性空間。本條宜改成全面告訴乃論，於親子間對於告訴與否意見不一時，宜限縮父母之獨立告訴權。

關鍵字

刑罰目的 ； 判斷能力 ； 年齡區分 ； 告訴權

並列摘要

At present, Article 227 of the Criminal Law aims to protect the physical and mental development of adolescents, but the elements of the law are too rigid and inelastic, leading to the application of the results in practice more harm than good. This article takes the article 227 of the criminal law as the research topic, adopts the qualitative interview research way, takes one of the judges, the procurators and the lawyers as the interview object, the interview faces includes: Can achieve the legislative purpose through the penalty effectively? Whether the need to maintain criminal penalties? Is there a need for a review of the existing law? When the victim is reluctant to file an independent complaint, should he be limited in his right to file an independent complaint? Interviewees generally agreed that it was difficult to achieve the purpose of protecting the physical and mental health of minors through penalties, and that many problems, including the two-generation notices, and many more. The majority of victims have considerable ability to judge, punishment is not the only way to solve such problems, the proposed with the relevant administrative measures. Based on the protection of minors physical and mental health considerations, is still not rashly comprehensive decriminalization. For the age of the victims, it is recommended that the age of 12 years of age, 12 years of age under the age of 16 to distinguish the standard, and adjust the upper and lower penalties, increase the flexibility of the judge sentencing space. If opinions vary between the parent and child, it should limit the right of parents to file an independent complaint.

並列關鍵字

Penalty purpose ； Judgment ability ； Age division ； Right to file