| dc.contributor | 法律系 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | 許恒達 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | Hsu, Heng-Da | |
| dc.date (日期) | 2019-11 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 17-Apr-2020 16:23:00 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 17-Apr-2020 16:23:00 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 17-Apr-2020 16:23:00 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/129272 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 本文討論新修正洗錢防制法後，如何解釋同法第 14 條的普通洗錢罪與 第 15 條特殊洗錢罪的問題，並以我國實務上最重要的兩類案例：人頭帳戶 提供者與車手是否構成洗錢罪作為中心，以保護法益為中心檢討普通洗錢罪 與特殊洗錢罪的合理性，並提出本文對於這兩則罪名的解釋建議： (1) 普通或特殊洗錢罪，均保護前置犯罪的司法權能，此即前置犯罪追 訴、定罪、處罰等效果的有效實現；所謂透明金流的保護，僅屬反射利益， 而非核心的保護內涵。 (2) 普通洗錢罪應該以掩飾隱恐犯罪所得作為基本行為態樣，而移轉、 變更、收受、持有、使用犯罪所得均為其具體類型； (3) 特殊洗錢罪則以無特定前置犯罪作為適用前提，其行為必須達到實 行各款所要求的異常金融交易行為，否則不成立特殊洗錢罪。 (4) 人頭帳戶提供者至多構成移轉型普通洗錢罪的幫助犯，但須以提供 者知悉洗錢行為內容為前提。 (5) 車手不成立特殊洗錢罪。至若構成詐欺罪幫助犯，則不應再論洗錢 罪名，若不成立詐欺罪幫助犯，則可考慮成立收受型洗錢罪。 | |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | This article aims to discuss the constitutionality of recidivists illustrated under the J.Y. Interpretation No.755 and the explanatory directions resulted from the subsequent judicial practice. Serious disputes over whether to uniformly aggravate the discretionary punishment’s lower limit for recidivists have occurred as the Interpretation failed to clarify the legal reasoning for such punishment, and even the Grand Justices have provided different suggestions for judicial interpretations in the concurring or dissenting opinions. This article opines that we should amend the law to abrogate recidivists and determine whether to aggravate the upper and lower limits for recidivists in each case based on the satisfaction of dual aggravation causes (i.e. aggravated unlawfulness and culpability) before such amendment. | |
| dc.format.extent | 639247 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 月旦法學雜誌, 294, 5-32 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 洗錢罪;特殊洗錢罪;人頭帳戶;車手;司法權限;透明金流 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Recidivist ; Discretioary Punishment ; Aggravated Unlawfulness ; Warning | |
| dc.title (題名) | 累犯與處斷刑加重之裁量：評大法官釋字第775 號解釋暨後續實務裁判 | |
| dc.title (題名) | Recidivists and the Decision of Aggravated Discretionary Punishment: Comments on the J.Y. Interpretation No.755 and the Subsequent Judicial Practice | |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | |
| dc.identifier.doi (DOI) | 10.3966/102559312019110294001 | |
| dc.doi.uri (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.3966/102559312019110294001 | |
