論構成要件外效果作為量刑因子──重新釐定刑法第 57 條第 9 款之射程範圍

Abstract

本文旨在釐清「構成要件外效果」必須符合何等要件，始屬我國刑法第 57 條第 9 款「犯罪所生之危險或損害」的射程範圍，而得作為從重量刑因子。此議題至關重要，卻向來為量刑研究空缺的一角，然「構成要件外效果」既未被立法者於法定構成要件中所明示，其射程或可廣袤無垠，倘未加以限縮，則犯罪論多年戮力發展的現代歸責理論將在很大程度上崩塌殆盡。 本文將以爬梳我國司法院各項量刑指引及實務判決為起點，繼而介紹並評析相應的德國刑法第 46 條第 2 項第 2 句「犯行之可歸咎效果」在實務與學說的多元論述，以彰顯癥結點所在。接續，本文擬由憲法上規範性人類圖像重新出發，依序對刑罰目的爭議、刑罰目的與量刑目的的交織關係、量刑罪責中犯行罪責（Tatschuld）與行為人罪責（Täterschuld）的糾葛，一一抽絲剝繭，梳理頭緒。最後，本文結論上主張構成要件外效果唯有符合下述前提時，始得依據我國刑法第 57 條第 9 款「犯罪所生之危險或損害」作為從重量刑因子：（一）系爭效果必須落入所違犯之構成要件保護範圍，而屬真正具有量刑法上意義的犯行效果；（二）系爭效果必須與犯行具有因果關係且客觀上可歸責；（三）行為人主觀上對系爭效果的招致至少具有預見可能性。

The purpose of this article is to clarify the prerequisites for extra-component effects to fall within the range of "danger or damage arising from the crime" in Article 57, Paragraph 9 of the Criminal Law of the Republic of China, and to be regarded as aggravating factors in sentencing. Starting from the sentencing guidelines and practical decisions of our country, the article will then outline and evaluate the practical and doctrinal discussion of the corresponding sentence 2 of Article 46(2) of the German Criminal Code. Subsequently, the article intends to restart from the constitutional normative image of human beings, and sort out the controversy over the purpose of punishment, the intertwined relationship between the purpose of punishment and the purpose of sentencing, and the entanglement of the offense's culpability and the offender’s culpability in sentencing guilt. This paper proposes a three-stage examination system for the extra-component effects. The only way to be regarded as an aggravating factor in accordance with Article 57(9) of the Criminal Law is to meet the following prerequisites: (1) the effect in question must fall within the scope of protection of the component element violated, (2) the effect must be causally related to the offense and objectively imputable, and (3) the perpetrator must have at least a foreseeable likelihood of incurring the effect.