刑事程序二審事後審制度之研究

張瑛宗(Ying -Tzung Chang)

指導教授 ： 王正嘉 ； 柯耀程

國立中正大學/法學院/法律學系/碩士(2016年)

摘要

我國現行刑事第二審係採「覆審制」，必須重複第一審相同之審判程序，不僅相當耗費訴訟資源，迅速裁判之要求亦無法落實，且因採覆審制之結果，第二審可以自為調查事實，第一審上訴或第三審撤銷發回之案件均集中在第二審，致案件在二、三審間徘徊遲遲無法定讞，對於人權保障更有不利之影響。而現行刑事訴訟法已採改良式當事人進行主義，第一審之事實審已成為刑事程序之重心，其判決自應受到尊重與支持，第二審實不宜再就上訴案件重覆審理，以避免當事人輕忽第一審，致使第一審之審判形骸化，從而第二審之上訴構造若改採「事後審制」，是否有助於上開弊病之解決，實有加以討論之必要。
本文從概述刑事第二審上訴之目的與功能開始探討，論及第二審上訴之架構，並討論覆審、續審制及事後審制之優劣，以供檢視上訴制度選擇之參考。再探討美、日二國第二審上訴採事後審制之不同處，藉他國法制探求我國採事後審制之可能性及建立審查標準。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，加以探討，嘗試剖析草案改採事後審制之利弊，並提出修法建議，以供刑事第二審上訴修正之參考。

關鍵字

事後審制 ； 覆審制 ； 審級構造 ； 上訴

並列摘要

The current second instance of the criminal trial system adopted by our country is trial de novo. Under this system, the court of second instance shall perform the same trial procedures as those in the court of first instance. In fact, de novo trial is not only a waste of lawsuit resources but also violates the speedy trial requirements. Under our current de novo trial system, the court of second instance has the discretionary power to conduct fact- finding. Meanwhile, there are also appeals from district courts and judgements reversed by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the court of second instance usually accumulates a lot of cases pending in its docket. As a result, quite a few convictions cannot be duly affirmed and this would be unfavorable to protection of human rights. Nowadays, the principle of “modified adversarial system” has been adopted by the Code of Criminal Procedure and the fact-finding hearing conducted by the court of first instance has played a key role in criminal procedure. Naturally, Judgements in the first instance should be respected and supported. Therefore, the court of second instance should not hold a new trial for appeals. This would prevent the litigants from disregarding first instance that usually reduces the initial trial itself to a mere formality. In view of the above mentioned, it is really necessary for us to explore if adoption of judicial review system in the appellate structure of second instance would be helpful in curing the deficiencies in our present trial system.
In this paper we first briefly overview the purposes of the first level of appeal and functions of second -instance courts in criminal cases, then we talk about appellate structure of second instance and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of three different types of criminal trial systems, namely, trial de novo, continuous trial system and judicial review system for the reference in choosing criminal appellate system suitable for our country. We also deeply discuss the major differences between the U.S. and Japanese appellate review system. By borrowing ideas from other countries, legal systems we try to explore the possibility of adoption of judicial review system in our country and establish standards of review. With reference to the draft amendment bill to the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding appeals adopted by the Judicial Yuan, we address ourselves to the relevant sections relating to the first level of appeal. We attempt to weigh pros and cons of the judicial review system which is adopted in the draft amendment bill proposed by the Judicial Yuan and offer our recommendations on amendments, giving a reference to the amendment of laws relating to the first level of appeal in criminal cases.

並列關鍵字

trial de novo ； the structure of trial system ； Right to appeal ； revision

參考文獻

5. 林鈺雄，刑事訴訟法(上)，自版，2010年9月6版。

8. 黃朝義，刑事訴訟法，新學林，2013年4月3版。

10. 黃朝義，刑訴修法軌跡之迷思，司法改革雜誌，第58期，頁66-71，2005年10月。

1. 王兆鵬，建構我國速審法之芻議─以美國法為參考，臺大法學論叢，第33卷第2期，頁137-204，2003年5月。

4. 沈宜生，美國刑事不對稱上訴制度，刑事法雜誌，第55卷，第1期，頁23-27，2011年2月。