少年量刑指引之建構－以日本法之比較為中心

Abstract

本文旨在建立一個合於少年事件處理法立法精神的少年量刑指引，以在少年刑事案件中提供給少年法院法官作為量刑決定時的參考依據。而根據本文對少年刑事案件定位的考察結果，所謂合於少年事件處理法的立法精神，即是指少年刑事案件與少年保護事件間，統合於少年健全自我成長下的連鎖關係，亦即，少年刑事案件與少年保護事件並無本質差異，而僅係形式性的不同程序。在這樣的理解之下，少年量刑自然也必須獨立於既有刑事司法的思考框架，而回歸到以少年健全自我成長為核心的脈絡當中。 而在以少年健全自我成長為核心的量刑目的與量刑標準之下，本文透過腦科學與神經科學等相關研究，指出在少年量刑決定中，少年健全自我成長與責任概念間的背反關係，並以之作為重構少年量刑框架的論理基礎。其中，除了以「至少讓少年於矯正學校執行階段轉換以前，有一次假釋審酌機會」作為其量刑上限以外，對於少年量刑的核心要素，則回歸到少年自身的生心理狀況及其所屬環境進行判斷，而若要將其具體套用到刑法第57條的條文之中，則少年量刑應是以刑法第57條第4、5、6款作為其論述基礎；同時，本文認為，在現行法的限制與一定條件之下，亦應同樣引入「假釋審酌機會」之觀點，作為少年量刑決定的內部界線，以適切回應促成少年健全自我成長的最終目標。

This article aims to establish a sentencing guideline for juveniles that aligns with the legislative spirit of the Juvenile Justice Act, providing a reference for judges in juvenile courts when making sentencing decisions. Based on the findings of this study regarding the positioning of juvenile criminal cases, the legislative spirit of aligning with the Juvenile Justice Act refers to the integrated chain of relationships between juvenile criminal cases and juvenile protection cases, implying that there is no fundamental difference between juvenile criminal cases and juvenile protection cases, only procedural differences. Under this understanding, juvenile sentencing must be independent of the existing framework of criminal justice and return to the context centered around the sound self-development of the juveniles. Within the framework of sentencing purposes and standards centered around the sound self-development of the juveniles, this article draws on relevant research in neuroscience and brain science to point out the inherent contradiction between the sound self-development of the juveniles and the concept of responsibility in juvenile sentencing, using it as a logical basis for reconstructing the juvenile sentencing framework. In addition to setting the upper limit of sentencing as "providing at least one parole opportunity before the transition from the Reformatory School," the core elements of juvenile sentencing are returned to the juvenile's own physical and psychological conditions and their environment for assessment. If it is to be specifically applied to Article 57 of the Criminal Code, juvenile sentencing should be based on the discussion of subparagraphs 4, 5, and 6 of Article 57. Furthermore, within the constraints and certain conditions of existing law, the viewpoint of "parole opportunity" should also be introduced as an internal boundary for juvenile sentencing decisions to appropriately respond to the ultimate goal of facilitating the sound self-development of the juveniles.