電腦詐欺與不正方法

Abstract

本文討論一九九七年刑法新增的電腦詐欺三則罪名（第三三九\\r條之一、之二及之三），這些罪名以自動設備或電腦系統作為侵害\\r客體，從而取得不法利益，然應如何認定其成罪界限，尤其是如何\\r判定成罪的構成要件行為「不正方法」，學說與實務往往面臨困擾。本文認為，要認定不正方法的實質內容，應觀察條文預設的交\\r易結構，不同交易結構下的不正方法即有不同，分述如下：一、第三三九條之一的交易結構是「財產給付／對待給付」，\\r故僅當使用者的給付不具財產性時，才算是不正方法；二、第三三九條之二的交易結構是「人別憑證／對待給付」，\\r只要使用者出示形式正確，卻未得本人授權的憑證，即屬不正方法；三、第三三九條之三欠缺上述交易結構，但至少規定了「輸入\\r虛偽資料及不正指令」等犯行，不正方法即為上述行為，至於成罪\\r重心，則是個別要素因果關聯性的判斷。

This study explores the present interpretation of liability for computer fraud which was enacted in Taiwan’s Criminal Code in 1997. The relevant paragraphs (§§ 339-1, 339-2 and 339-3) aimed to deal with computer fraud which caused a significant amount of property damage at that time. However, since the legislature adopted many unclear concepts such as unlawful means, data processing, fees-collecting apparatus, and automated teller machine, et al., how to interpret these offensive conditions remains a difficult issue for criminal justice specialists and academic circles up to the present. The author finds that the resolution of these problems could stem from the investigation of the trading structure in each paragraph, e.g. §§ 339-1 and 339-2. In addition, as no trading structure can be established in § 339-3, the key to interpreting it should be the causal relation between all elements of § 339-3.