餽贈罪的成罪界限與立法研議

Abstract

法務部曾在2018年提出刑法修正草案，試圖透過修正刑法第121條之職務賄賂罪與增訂刑法第122條之1之餽贈罪的這兩種方式，來解決實務上賄賂罪之對價關係不易認定的問題。本文在分析兩種解決方式之後，初步認為僅僅只是修正職務賄賂罪並無法完全解決問題，餽贈罪之增訂應有其必要。然而，作為我國餽贈罪立法之參考對象的美國聯邦餽贈罪（18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(1)）其本身在美國法上的解釋適用即頗具爭議，這也連帶影響到我國餽贈罪的立法設計，造成我國文獻大多對餽贈罪之立法採取較為消極的態度。本文認為，餽贈罪之立法並不能只是單純地援引外國法，而是必須對餽贈行為之不法有更詳盡的討論。準此，本文將藉由檢視美國法上餽贈罪之發展來加深對於餽贈罪之理解，並進而提出本文認為較為妥適的餽贈罪基本立法架構，以供未來立法上之參考。

In 2018, the Ministry of Justice proposed an amendment to the Criminal Code, attempting to solve the difficulty in recognizing the quid pro quo element in bribery cases by two approaches: amending Article 121 on the crime of bribery for official duties and introducing a new Article 122-1 on the crime of illegal gratuities. After analyzing these two approaches, this article preliminarily advocates that merely amending the official bribery offense cannot fully resolve the problem, and the introduction of the crime of illegal gratuities is necessary. However, the U.S. federal gratuities offense (18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(1)), which is a reference for Taiwan’s gratuities offense draft, was highly controversial in its interpretation and application. This controversy also influenced the legislative design of Taiwan’s gratuities offense, making most Taiwanese academic literature take a relatively passive stance on its enactment. This article suggests that the legislation on illegal gratuities should not simply adopt foreign laws. Instead, it is necessary to engage in a more detailed discussion of the illegality of gratuity-giving behavior. Therefore, this article will examine the development of the U.S. federal gratuities offense to enhance the understanding of the illegal gratuities and subsequently propose a more appropriate legislative framework as a reference for future legislation.