iVOD / 170645
本逐字稿內容由 AI 自動生成，可能包含錯誤、遺漏或誤譯之處。請使用者務必與原始影片音訊內容交叉比對，以確保資訊正確性。另可參考立法院日後釋出的正式公報以取得最終權威版本。
沈發惠 @ 第11屆第5會期司法及法制委員會第26次全體委員會議
| Start Time | End Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00,000 | 00:00:14,000 | 主席我們請次長 |
| 00:00:14,000 | 00:00:16,000 | 有請次長 |
| 00:00:16,000 | 00:00:18,000 | 委員好 |
| 00:00:18,000 | 00:00:20,000 | 次長好 |
| 00:00:20,000 | 00:00:25,000 | 我看我們今天的這個有關於刑法第185條13的這個修正草案 |
| 00:00:25,000 | 00:00:29,000 | 總共我們的議程列出來總共56個草案 |
| 00:00:29,000 | 00:00:32,000 | 有56個草案包括我們院板在內 |
| 00:00:32,000 | 00:00:36,000 | 那這個草案是非常非常多56個 |
| 00:00:36,000 | 00:00:40,000 | 但是裡面我看大概絕大多數就是以提高刑責為主 |
| 00:00:40,000 | 00:00:44,000 | 但是提高刑責大家每一個人的草案有不一樣的刑度 |
| 00:00:44,000 | 00:00:47,000 | 有不一樣的藥件的修改 |
| 00:00:47,000 | 00:00:53,000 | 那整個我比對了一下大概文字一模一樣大概只有10個 |
| 00:00:53,000 | 00:00:56,000 | 其他大家每一個委員所提的都不一樣 |
| 00:00:56,000 | 00:00:58,000 | 雖然都是提高刑度 |
| 00:00:58,000 | 00:01:04,000 | 但是提高刑度的這個標準樣態什麼都有各有不同 |
| 00:01:04,000 | 00:01:10,000 | 那所以我就主要就是以我們的院板來做我今天的就院板的部分 |
| 00:01:10,000 | 00:01:13,000 | 來請教一下次長 |
| 00:01:13,000 | 00:01:17,000 | 這個我們這個事實上 |
| 00:01:17,000 | 00:01:22,000 | 這個剛很多委員大家上來大家都知道都提說這個毒價 |
| 00:01:22,000 | 00:01:24,000 | 目前社會大家多麼重視 |
| 00:01:24,000 | 00:01:27,000 | 這個毒價對社會的危害 |
| 00:01:27,000 | 00:01:33,000 | 這個到了這個一般人民無法接受的程度 |
| 00:01:33,000 | 00:01:39,000 | 所以事實上我們整個毒價短短幾年內我們其實修法修了非常多次 |
| 00:01:39,000 | 00:01:43,000 | 我們不斷的提高它的刑度而且不斷的修改 |
| 00:01:43,000 | 00:01:48,000 | 我們在這個從1999年這個民國88年 |
| 00:01:48,000 | 00:01:52,000 | 第一次把這個毒品服用毒品制不能安全駕駛 |
| 00:01:52,000 | 00:01:57,000 | 納入這個不能安全駕駛罪到現在已經27年了 |
| 00:01:57,000 | 00:02:01,000 | 這27年內我們做了許多次的修改 |
| 00:02:01,000 | 00:02:06,000 | 包括這個把酒駕的部分把這個不以發生具體危險 |
| 00:02:06,000 | 00:02:08,000 | 把它變成抽象危險犯 |
| 00:02:08,000 | 00:02:15,000 | 那到這個三年前我們把毒價也納入這個抽象危險犯的範疇 |
| 00:02:16,000 | 00:02:22,000 | 所以我在這看說這一次我們等於說在幾年內我們再一次修法 |
| 00:02:22,000 | 00:02:25,000 | 這一次我就看我們修法的重點到底是什麼 |
| 00:02:25,000 | 00:02:29,000 | 其實這一次我們院板我看我們院板修法大概就是三個重點 |
| 00:02:29,000 | 00:02:34,000 | 第一個就是最特別的我等一下可能也會跟市長來談 |
| 00:02:34,000 | 00:02:37,000 | 就是我們把這個酒駕跟毒價分流了 |
| 00:02:37,000 | 00:02:43,000 | 過去這個不能安全駕駛罪是酒駕跟毒價 |
| 00:02:43,000 | 00:02:46,000 | 酒駕跟毒價它是同樣在第一項的四款要件 |
| 00:02:46,000 | 00:02:48,000 | 它的法律效果都一樣 |
| 00:02:48,000 | 00:02:50,000 | 但是這一次我們把它分開了分流了 |
| 00:02:50,000 | 00:02:53,000 | 酒駕變成第一項毒價變成第二項 |
| 00:02:53,000 | 00:02:57,000 | 它違反第一項跟第二項它的整個法律效果都不一樣 |
| 00:02:57,000 | 00:02:59,000 | 就把酒駕跟毒價分流了 |
| 00:02:59,000 | 00:03:02,000 | 這是第一次修法的第一個重點 |
| 00:03:02,000 | 00:03:07,000 | 第二個就是說因為分流之後我們把毒價的部分的行度把它提高了 |
| 00:03:07,000 | 00:03:09,000 | 這是我修法的第二個重點 |
| 00:03:09,000 | 00:03:12,000 | 也就是酒駕我們維持原本的行動 |
| 00:03:12,000 | 00:03:14,000 | 毒價的部分我們把行度提高了 |
| 00:03:14,000 | 00:03:19,000 | 因為分流之後我們才可以單獨把這個毒價的部分把行度提高 |
| 00:03:19,000 | 00:03:28,000 | 那第三個就是我們偵測了這個新增的這個酒駕毒價致死傷 |
| 00:03:28,000 | 00:03:30,000 | 它的車輛的沒收規定 |
| 00:03:30,000 | 00:03:34,000 | 大概就是我們這三個重點就是我們今天要討論的 |
| 00:03:34,000 | 00:03:37,000 | 那這個部分有關於第三個部分 |
| 00:03:37,000 | 00:03:39,000 | 有關於這個沒收的部分 |
| 00:03:39,000 | 00:03:41,000 | 事實上我是 |
| 00:03:41,000 | 00:03:43,000 | 我這裡有這個一個月前 |
| 00:03:43,000 | 00:03:45,000 | 就六月八號在這裡部長 |
| 00:03:45,000 | 00:03:47,000 | 那時候我就跟部長 |
| 00:03:47,000 | 00:03:52,000 | 就是就這個酒駕毒價的車輛沒收的問題 |
| 00:03:52,000 | 00:03:55,000 | 我認為那時候我就主張說要修法 |
| 00:03:55,000 | 00:03:57,000 | 我們這種義務沒收 |
| 00:03:57,000 | 00:03:59,000 | 它等於是沒收的特別規定 |
| 00:03:59,000 | 00:04:03,000 | 一定要有修法你才有辦法執行 |
| 00:04:03,000 | 00:04:10,000 | 你不能沒有辦法用這個所謂公犯罪所用的這個犯罪預備之物 |
| 00:04:10,000 | 00:04:12,000 | 不能用沒有辦法用這一條來使用 |
| 00:04:12,000 | 00:04:14,000 | 一定要有特別規定 |
| 00:04:14,000 | 00:04:17,000 | 那這一次修法等於是把這個特別規定納入了 |
| 00:04:17,000 | 00:04:22,000 | 就是本席那時候所主張的這個有關沒收的這個特別規定 |
| 00:04:22,000 | 00:04:24,000 | 這個部分我肯定 |
| 00:04:24,000 | 00:04:26,000 | 我認為說這個修法方向是正確的 |
| 00:04:26,000 | 00:04:30,000 | 那所以回到我們剛剛所講的就是有關於我們 |
| 00:04:30,000 | 00:04:33,000 | 我看外國立法有間列出外國立法例 |
| 00:04:33,000 | 00:04:36,000 | 不管德國也好日本也好英國也好加拿大也好 |
| 00:04:36,000 | 00:04:38,000 | 這些大部分的外國立法例 |
| 00:04:38,000 | 00:04:42,000 | 幾乎從來我也沒有看過說有把酒駕跟毒價分流的規定 |
| 00:04:42,000 | 00:04:45,000 | 幾乎都不能安全駕駛罪都是合在一起 |
| 00:04:45,000 | 00:04:46,000 | 不管你是酒駕 |
| 00:04:46,000 | 00:04:51,000 | 不管你是受酒精影響還是受麻醉物品影響受藥物影響 |
| 00:04:51,000 | 00:04:54,000 | 我這裡都列出來大概都是合在一起 |
| 00:04:54,000 | 00:04:56,000 | 但是我們這一次特別 |
| 00:04:56,000 | 00:04:59,000 | 這等於是在所有各國的立法例裡面 |
| 00:04:59,000 | 00:05:01,000 | 我們非常特別 |
| 00:05:01,000 | 00:05:05,000 | 而且應該是我看到的把酒駕跟毒價把它分流了 |
| 00:05:05,000 | 00:05:08,000 | 那我們就做了這樣子的規定 |
| 00:05:08,000 | 00:05:09,000 | 我們沒有反對 |
| 00:05:09,000 | 00:05:13,000 | 但是我們要談清楚為什麼我們把它分流了 |
| 00:05:13,000 | 00:05:14,000 | 我們把它分流 |
| 00:05:14,000 | 00:05:17,000 | 我看你們立法裡面講說這個 |
| 00:05:17,000 | 00:05:20,000 | 其實酒駕跟毒價保護的法義都是一樣的 |
| 00:05:20,000 | 00:05:23,000 | 它就是這個公共交通安全 |
| 00:05:23,000 | 00:05:26,000 | 還有這個用路人的生命身體安全的這個 |
| 00:05:27,000 | 00:05:30,000 | 個人的法義這個保障的法義都一樣 |
| 00:05:30,000 | 00:05:34,000 | 那你們提到說為什麼把它分流 |
| 00:05:34,000 | 00:05:38,000 | 是因為酒駕跟毒價本質惡害性不同 |
| 00:05:38,000 | 00:05:41,000 | 這個部分要請市長說明 |
| 00:05:41,000 | 00:05:43,000 | 本質惡害性哪裡不同 |
| 00:05:43,000 | 00:05:46,000 | 它的說本質惡害性不同的依據是什麼 |
| 00:05:46,000 | 00:05:49,000 | 各位報告我們毒品之所以為毒品 |
| 00:05:49,000 | 00:05:51,000 | 我們毒品為防治條例明文規定 |
| 00:05:51,000 | 00:05:54,000 | 它因為成癮性濫用性性跟社會危害性 |
| 00:05:54,000 | 00:05:57,000 | 所以毒品它本質上就是有社會危害性 |
| 00:05:57,000 | 00:06:01,000 | 那我們在一個刑法的刑責要符合它罪責相當 |
| 00:06:01,000 | 00:06:02,000 | 在罪責的決定的時候 |
| 00:06:02,000 | 00:06:05,000 | 社會危害性它也是決定這罪責輕重的 |
| 00:06:05,000 | 00:06:07,000 | 一個非常重要的一個參考 |
| 00:06:07,000 | 00:06:10,000 | 所以毒品它為什麼罪責比較重 |
| 00:06:10,000 | 00:06:12,000 | 因為它的社會造成了社會危害性 |
| 00:06:12,000 | 00:06:14,000 | 因為毒品一旦失用之後 |
| 00:06:14,000 | 00:06:19,000 | 它可能造成人員的傷亡的社會危害更大於酒駕 |
| 00:06:19,000 | 00:06:20,000 | 所以在這個狀況之下 |
| 00:06:20,000 | 00:06:22,000 | 所以我們認為毒價跟酒價 |
| 00:06:22,000 | 00:06:24,000 | 它罪責是不一樣的 |
| 00:06:24,000 | 00:06:26,000 | 所以它做一個差異性的處理 |
| 00:06:26,000 | 00:06:29,000 | 所以這個說法毒品跟喝酒 |
| 00:06:29,000 | 00:06:31,000 | 吸毒跟喝酒它當然是社會 |
| 00:06:31,000 | 00:06:33,000 | 這個法律評價當然是不一樣的 |
| 00:06:33,000 | 00:06:36,000 | 但是就不能安全駕駛的這件事情上面 |
| 00:06:36,000 | 00:06:40,000 | 這兩個東西其實世界各國的立法律都是放在一起的 |
| 00:06:40,000 | 00:06:44,000 | 所以這個部分我覺得有一個說法 |
| 00:06:44,000 | 00:06:46,000 | 但是你們就是要有一個說法 |
| 00:06:46,000 | 00:06:48,000 | 你們要告訴社會告訴法界 |
| 00:06:48,000 | 00:06:51,000 | 就是說我們為什麼把它分開來評價 |
| 00:06:51,000 | 00:06:54,000 | 為什麼把酒價跟毒價分開來 |
| 00:06:54,000 | 00:06:56,000 | 但是問題又來了 |
| 00:06:56,000 | 00:06:58,000 | 我們在評價上面 |
| 00:06:58,000 | 00:07:02,000 | 如果剛才我們這個次長所講的 |
| 00:07:02,000 | 00:07:05,000 | 它的這個社會本質的惡害性不同 |
| 00:07:05,000 | 00:07:10,000 | 但是我們認為它危險性跟這個罪責評價都應該要分開來 |
| 00:07:10,000 | 00:07:17,000 | 但是我們在後面的這個有關於這個特別栽犯的規定 |
| 00:07:17,000 | 00:07:19,000 | 我們又把這兩個又合在一起 |
| 00:07:20,000 | 00:07:25,000 | 也就是說我們現在前面規定酒價就酒價的法律要件 |
| 00:07:25,000 | 00:07:27,000 | 毒價就毒價的法律要件 |
| 00:07:27,000 | 00:07:29,000 | 但是有關在犯的部分 |
| 00:07:29,000 | 00:07:31,000 | 你酒價跟毒價就是合併計算了 |
| 00:07:31,000 | 00:07:33,000 | 這個在邏輯上 |
| 00:07:33,000 | 00:07:35,000 | 這個我都不反對 |
| 00:07:35,000 | 00:07:37,000 | 但是我只是說在邏輯上面 |
| 00:07:37,000 | 00:07:40,000 | 次長是不是能夠在這個部分做一點說明 |
| 00:07:40,000 | 00:07:44,000 | 就是或者是說過去我們過去的統計上面 |
| 00:07:44,000 | 00:07:46,000 | 酒價跟毒價交叉 |
| 00:07:46,000 | 00:07:49,000 | 在罰有做過這樣的統計嗎 |
| 00:07:49,000 | 00:07:51,000 | 我們十年內在犯的話 |
| 00:07:51,000 | 00:07:53,000 | 它我們行者還是做不一樣的 |
| 00:07:53,000 | 00:07:56,000 | 酒價在犯酒價的可能很多 |
| 00:07:56,000 | 00:07:58,000 | 毒價在犯毒價可能很多 |
| 00:07:58,000 | 00:08:00,000 | 但是我酒價然後在犯毒價 |
| 00:08:00,000 | 00:08:02,000 | 這個是我們現在後面的規定 |
| 00:08:02,000 | 00:08:04,000 | 因為我們前面把酒價跟毒價分開了 |
| 00:08:04,000 | 00:08:06,000 | 但是我們現在在犯的規定 |
| 00:08:06,000 | 00:08:08,000 | 我們就把兩個合併計算 |
| 00:08:08,000 | 00:08:10,000 | 但是我們現在為什麼特別處罰 |
| 00:08:10,000 | 00:08:12,000 | 是因為它在犯的毒價跟酒價做不同的評價 |
| 00:08:12,000 | 00:08:14,000 | 它前面是毒價或酒價我們不論 |
| 00:08:14,000 | 00:08:16,000 | 因為它前面已經有個毒價或酒價 |
| 00:08:16,000 | 00:08:18,000 | 或酒價行為 |
| 00:08:18,000 | 00:08:21,000 | 我們現在處罰後面它在犯毒價或酒價而不同處 |
| 00:08:21,000 | 00:08:24,000 | 但是你們後面的這個毒價跟酒價 |
| 00:08:24,000 | 00:08:26,000 | 你們前面把它分開來了 |
| 00:08:26,000 | 00:08:28,000 | 各層要件把它分開來了 |
| 00:08:28,000 | 00:08:31,000 | 分開來之後但是你在在犯的條件上面 |
| 00:08:31,000 | 00:08:33,000 | 你又把它合併了 |
| 00:08:33,000 | 00:08:35,000 | 這個在邏輯上面是有點 |
| 00:08:35,000 | 00:08:38,000 | 我了解前面它無論是毒價或酒價 |
| 00:08:38,000 | 00:08:40,000 | 我們現在處罰的是它在犯 |
| 00:08:40,000 | 00:08:42,000 | 它因為在犯 |
| 00:08:42,000 | 00:08:44,000 | 但是在犯有在犯的定義 |
| 00:08:44,000 | 00:08:46,000 | 你不能說我過去有竊盜 |
| 00:08:46,000 | 00:08:48,000 | 結果我今天又殺人你說這個叫在犯 |
| 00:08:48,000 | 00:08:50,000 | 這不對這法律上不是這樣 |
| 00:08:50,000 | 00:08:52,000 | 我意思說你前面把它分開來評價了 |
| 00:08:52,000 | 00:08:54,000 | 但是你現在卻把在犯 |
| 00:08:54,000 | 00:08:56,000 | 卻把酒價跟毒價又合併計算 |
| 00:08:56,000 | 00:08:58,000 | 這個在法邏輯上面是不是有點包困 |
| 00:08:58,000 | 00:09:00,000 | 那如果這樣會非常 |
| 00:09:00,000 | 00:09:02,000 | 邏輯上會非常複雜它的排列組合會非常多 |
| 00:09:02,000 | 00:09:04,000 | 毒價、毒價、毒價、酒價、酒價 |
| 00:09:04,000 | 00:09:06,000 | 你們現在就是這樣 |
| 00:09:06,000 | 00:09:08,000 | 你的意思說如果分開評價會變得非常複雜 |
| 00:09:08,000 | 00:09:10,000 | 會非常複雜所以我們現在是前面 |
| 00:09:10,000 | 00:09:12,000 | 現在無論是毒價或酒價都是前面的犯罪 |
| 00:09:12,000 | 00:09:14,000 | 你後面只要再犯毒價或酒價 |
| 00:09:14,000 | 00:09:16,000 | 我們就有你後面的毒價或酒價 |
| 00:09:16,000 | 00:09:18,000 | 做不同的處理 |
| 00:09:18,000 | 00:09:20,000 | 而不是你前面再犯的是什麼 |
| 00:09:20,000 | 00:09:22,000 | 前面只要是公共危險就會構成我們的前犯 |
| 00:09:22,000 | 00:09:24,000 | 好這部分 |
| 00:09:24,000 | 00:09:26,000 | 這部分我沒有反對啦 |
| 00:09:26,000 | 00:09:28,000 | 但我只是覺得你們既然前面把 |
| 00:09:28,000 | 00:09:30,000 | 酒價跟毒價分開來評價了 |
| 00:09:30,000 | 00:09:32,000 | 但是我再犯 |
| 00:09:32,000 | 00:09:34,000 | 再犯的時候你又把兩種不同的行為 |
| 00:09:34,000 | 00:09:36,000 | 太樣你又把它合併計算 |
| 00:09:36,000 | 00:09:38,000 | 那這個特別 |
| 00:09:38,000 | 00:09:40,000 | 這個特別再犯制度除了這個部分以外 |
| 00:09:40,000 | 00:09:42,000 | 其實學界還有一些 |
| 00:09:42,000 | 00:09:44,000 | 對於我們這個特別再犯制度其實有蠻多的 |
| 00:09:44,000 | 00:09:46,000 | 質疑啦這幾年來 |
| 00:09:46,000 | 00:09:48,000 | 因為我們這個特別再犯制度 |
| 00:09:48,000 | 00:09:50,000 | 這次並沒有修改啦這是原本的條文啦 |
| 00:09:50,000 | 00:09:52,000 | 這第五項跟第六項 |
| 00:09:52,000 | 00:09:54,000 | 有關酒價再犯跟這個 |
| 00:09:54,000 | 00:09:56,000 | 毒價再犯 |
| 00:09:56,000 | 00:09:58,000 | 但是它是一個特別再犯的規定 |
| 00:09:58,000 | 00:10:00,000 | 我們一般的這個禮判規定 |
| 00:10:00,000 | 00:10:02,000 | 在刑法第47條裡面 |
| 00:10:02,000 | 00:10:04,000 | 但是我們這裡有特別規定 |
| 00:10:04,000 | 00:10:06,000 | 特別可以把5年放寬到10年 |
| 00:10:06,000 | 00:10:08,000 | 放寬到10年 |
| 00:10:08,000 | 00:10:10,000 | 過去是你5年內再犯才算是累犯 |
| 00:10:10,000 | 00:10:12,000 | 我們這個條文 |
| 00:10:12,000 | 00:10:14,000 | 我們把它到10年 |
| 00:10:14,000 | 00:10:16,000 | 其實我們這不是累犯的概念 |
| 00:10:16,000 | 00:10:18,000 | 它是再犯的概念 |
| 00:10:18,000 | 00:10:20,000 | 它是一個特別再犯嘛 |
| 00:10:20,000 | 00:10:22,000 | 所以它到把那個期限 |
| 00:10:22,000 | 00:10:24,000 | 弄到10年 |
| 00:10:24,000 | 00:10:26,000 | 這是第一個爭議啦 |
| 00:10:26,000 | 00:10:28,000 | 第二個就是說你們在規定上面 |
| 00:10:28,000 | 00:10:30,000 | 你們 |
| 00:10:30,000 | 00:10:32,000 | 有這個就 |
| 00:10:32,000 | 00:10:34,000 | 有罪判決確定 |
| 00:10:34,000 | 00:10:36,000 | 罪罪處分確定 |
| 00:10:36,000 | 00:10:38,000 | 兩個都 |
| 00:10:38,000 | 00:10:40,000 | 作為這個再犯的條件 |
| 00:10:40,000 | 00:10:42,000 | 那有罪判決決定 |
| 00:10:42,000 | 00:10:44,000 | 當然沒有問題啊 |
| 00:10:44,000 | 00:10:46,000 | 它就是再犯 |
| 00:10:46,000 | 00:10:48,000 | 但是所謂緩起訴處分 |
| 00:10:48,000 | 00:10:50,000 | 這個部分可能就在法界上面 |
| 00:10:50,000 | 00:10:52,000 | 其實有蠻大的 |
| 00:10:52,000 | 00:10:54,000 | 這個我想市長應該知道 |
| 00:10:54,000 | 00:10:56,000 | 法界上面對於說 |
| 00:10:56,000 | 00:10:58,000 | 你緩起訴處分事實上未經法院的審理 |
| 00:10:58,000 | 00:11:00,000 | 他是我們檢察官就做成緩起訴處分了 |
| 00:11:00,000 | 00:11:02,000 | 事實上他的 |
| 00:11:02,000 | 00:11:04,000 | 這個犯罪事實沒有經過法院 |
| 00:11:04,000 | 00:11:06,000 | 不曾經過法院的調查 |
| 00:11:06,000 | 00:11:08,000 | 但是你們在這個 |
| 00:11:08,000 | 00:11:10,000 | 這個再犯的規定 |
| 00:11:10,000 | 00:11:12,000 | 緩起訴處分的效果等同於 |
| 00:11:12,000 | 00:11:14,000 | 等同於這個有罪判決的確定 |
| 00:11:14,000 | 00:11:16,000 | 所以我們 |
| 00:11:16,000 | 00:11:18,000 | 這個我也不反對啦 |
| 00:11:18,000 | 00:11:20,000 | 事實上很多 |
| 00:11:20,000 | 00:11:22,000 | 過去很多酒駕 |
| 00:11:22,000 | 00:11:24,000 | 例如在鄉下 |
| 00:11:24,000 | 00:11:26,000 | 那個歐吉桑就喝了保麗達 |
| 00:11:26,000 | 00:11:28,000 | 騎了摩托車 |
| 00:11:28,000 | 00:11:30,000 | 那你這個也要起訴在法院審 |
| 00:11:30,000 | 00:11:32,000 | 很多這種狀況 |
| 00:11:32,000 | 00:11:34,000 | 所以在檢察官部分就把緩起訴掉了 |
| 00:11:34,000 | 00:11:36,000 | 但是也不 |
| 00:11:36,000 | 00:11:38,000 | 緩起訴也不一定是這種狀況 |
| 00:11:38,000 | 00:11:40,000 | 也有可能有情況案情單純 |
| 00:11:40,000 | 00:11:42,000 | 認罪其實把他緩起訴了 |
| 00:11:42,000 | 00:11:44,000 | 初犯把他緩起訴了 |
| 00:11:44,000 | 00:11:46,000 | 但是你把他 |
| 00:11:46,000 | 00:11:48,000 | 這個緩起訴處分確定 |
| 00:11:48,000 | 00:11:50,000 | 也當作再犯的一個條件 |
| 00:11:50,000 | 00:11:52,000 | 學界有質疑我不反對 |
| 00:11:52,000 | 00:11:54,000 | 我本席不反對但是學界有質疑 |
| 00:11:54,000 | 00:11:56,000 | 我覺得我們應該回應 |
| 00:11:56,000 | 00:11:58,000 | 所以我剛講說他不是累犯的概念 |
| 00:11:58,000 | 00:12:00,000 | 累犯概念是有罪執行完畢後 |
| 00:12:00,000 | 00:12:02,000 | 五年內再犯叫累犯 |
| 00:12:02,000 | 00:12:04,000 | 我們說叫再犯 |
| 00:12:04,000 | 00:12:06,000 | 他是有一個公共危險的事實 |
| 00:12:06,000 | 00:12:08,000 | 這個事實的存在我們後面再加重 |
| 00:12:08,000 | 00:12:10,000 | 這個事實的存在 |
| 00:12:10,000 | 00:12:12,000 | 有罪判決確定當然 |
| 00:12:12,000 | 00:12:14,000 | 沒有問題 他不是累犯 |
| 00:12:14,000 | 00:12:16,000 | 累犯才是有罪判決確定 |
| 00:12:16,000 | 00:12:18,000 | 你們這裡說 |
| 00:12:18,000 | 00:12:20,000 | 我們要再犯 |
| 00:12:20,000 | 00:12:22,000 | 這個再犯沒有錯 |
| 00:12:22,000 | 00:12:24,000 | 但是你的條文內容就是說 |
| 00:12:24,000 | 00:12:26,000 | 懲犯本條 |
| 00:12:26,000 | 00:12:28,000 | 第四條 |
| 00:12:28,000 | 00:12:30,000 | 經有罪判決確定獲 |
| 00:12:30,000 | 00:12:32,000 | 緩起訴處分 |
| 00:12:32,000 | 00:12:34,000 | 但是這個緩起訴處分 |
| 00:12:34,000 | 00:12:36,000 | 在學界有滿大的爭議 |
| 00:12:36,000 | 00:12:38,000 | 我們應該要有所回應 |
| 00:12:38,000 | 00:12:40,000 | 為什麼我們一個未經法院 |
| 00:12:40,000 | 00:12:42,000 | 審理他的事實上未經法院 |
| 00:12:42,000 | 00:12:44,000 | 審理他是檢察官 |
| 00:12:44,000 | 00:12:46,000 | 這邊就做緩起訴處分 |
| 00:12:46,000 | 00:12:48,000 | 你們這緩起訴處分你們也納入這個 |
| 00:12:48,000 | 00:12:50,000 | 這個部分我覺得應該要有所回應 |
| 00:12:50,000 | 00:12:52,000 | 謝謝 |
| 00:12:52,000 | 00:12:54,000 | 謝謝 |
| 00:12:54,000 | 00:12:56,000 | 謝謝 |