| dc.contributor | 法律系 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | 謝如媛 | |
| dc.date (日期) | 2014-07 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 31-Jul-2025 15:49:03 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 31-Jul-2025 15:49:03 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 31-Jul-2025 15:49:03 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/158224 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 緩刑，屬於一種刑罰（刑事制裁）的暫免實施，故其暫免實施應該是要能夠足以達到原本刑罰的目標。理論上，在教育刑的理念下，緩刑能夠引導犯罪人真正達成復歸社會的理想，減少監所拘禁的弊病，甚至減少再犯。然而，在我國，由於種種問題，實際上緩刑從未達成上述的理想，僅成為刑事法教科書上的一種宣示。探究我國刑法司法上對緩刑之判斷，至少存在著以下之問題 1.我國准許緩刑之比率與各國比較實在不高，適用範圍有限。2.就刑法第74 條第1項是否給予被告緩刑的判斷上，判決的裁量標準未必明確，初步查閱也發現有判決不一致的情形，影響判決公平性及人民信賴。3.目前實務上之裁量標準，以及司法院「加強緩刑宣告實施要點」，其理論基礎、宣告緩刑期間之決定標準、刑法第74 條第2 項各款負擔之適用基準等，無論在實務判決上及理論上仍有不盡明確或不合理之處，影響人民權益甚鉅，極需檢討。 4. 以擴大緩刑適用之觀點，進行比較法研究，可促進緩刑制度之機能。我國尚欠缺充分的此類討論。在此背景下，本計畫透過文獻整理及判分析決的實證研究，進行一個為期兩年的綜合研究。先整理歸納分析實務上影響法官判斷緩刑因素究竟為何，進行刑罰與刑事政策理論上的檢討，並進一步以擴大緩刑適用為觀點，參考國外之比較法制，據此提出具體的法制建議。期能擴大法制及實務上的緩刑適用空間，真正減少監禁處遇、落實犯罪行為人回歸社會的刑事政策理念。 | |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | The first section in Article 74 of the Criminal Code is in regard to the conditions for determining suspension of punishment. Apart form the legal elements, for instance, there has been no criminal conviction within five (5) years, or no previous sentence to imprisonment for not more than two (2) years; the statute also leaves room for judicial discretion, which is literally rendered as “temporary suspension is considered appropriate”. Nevertheless, the ratio for suspension of punishment has decreased in the year after the Criminal Code has been amended in 2005 by including the provisions for suspension of punishment with conditions and expressly allowed such probation for offense committed negligently. Over the past 10 years, the ratio for suspension of punishment remains steadily below 20% of the overall convicted. This ratio is relatively low compare with countries such as Japan, Germany or China, and hence raise doubts as to why the ratio remains practically low in Taiwan? The aim of this project is to discover the main factors for determining suspension of punishment in Taiwan. In practice, such standard would relate to what does the judge put into consideration when comparing between “enhancing defendant’s rehabilitation”, “needs of general prevention” and “needs of victim’s protection”. In view of the legal system, factors such as the expended execution of a punishment commuted to a fine and community labor service in recent years, the protective control be a mere formality, and the lack of Pre-Sentence Investigations all arguably affect the judiciary’s reluctance to suspend punishment. If the aforementioned factors have in fact influenced the judge’s reluctance to suspend punishment and could be improved in some way, then this would help to expend the applicability of suspension of punishment and fulfill the criminal policy of diversion with services. | |
| dc.format.extent | 115 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | text/html | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 行政院國家科學委員會, NSC101-2410-H004-043-MY2, 101.08-103.07 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 緩刑; 刑罰; 監禁; 社區處遇; 社會統合; 刑事政策 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | suspended sentence; probation; punishment; imprisonment; community treatment; reintegration; penal policy | |
| dc.title (題名) | 影響法官宣告緩刑因素之研究與建議 | |
| dc.title (題名) | the main factors for determining suspension of sentence | |
| dc.type (資料類型) | report | |
