法學期刊
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 妨害食品安全刑事責任之探討(The Study on Criminal Responsibility of Offenses against Food Safety)
編著譯者: 張麗卿
出版日期: 2014.04
刊登出處: 台灣/東海大學法學研究第 42 期 /53-107 頁
頁  數: 55 點閱次數: 320
下載點數: 220 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 東海大學法律學院 授權者指定不分配權利金給作者)
關 鍵 詞: 食品安全危險犯普通刑法附屬刑法公務員責任
中文摘要: 飲食是人類維持生命最基本的要求,惟現今社會,破壞食品安全的事件屢見不鮮,台灣近期發生的毒澱粉事件,引起廣大民眾的恐慌,也對食品衛生安全產生疑慮。為了有效保障食品衛生安全,須從法制面著手。
食品衛生安全的法律規範很廣,除可能牽涉到民事上的之損害賠償,或行政處罰之沒入銷毀、通知回收、廢止營業執照或罰緩等外,對於一旦侵害食品衛生安全法益,造成民眾健康危害時,就有動用刑罰的可能;因為在刑法保護法益之目的下,無法容忍食品業者,侵害廣大消費民眾的生命及身體安全。然而,食品衛生安全犯罪態樣繁多,台灣普通刑法的規定無法完全因應食品犯罪之內涵,需要進一步以附屬刑法(食品衛生安全管理法)的方式來保障食品的安全。
本文除針對違法普通刑法之第 191 條「製造販賣陳列妨害衛生物品罪」、第 191 條之 1「毒化飲食物品罪」加以論述外;更針對 2013 及 2014 年 2 月最新修正的違反食品安全衛生管理法第 49 條之罪,如:(1)攙偽或假冒、添加未經許可添加物之「攙入未經許可添加物罪」、(2)對於違反食品、食品添加物以及包裝物等安全規範之「製造販賣有毒有害食品罪」、(3)食品廣告限制之「虛假食品廣告罪」(4)對於食品營業登記規範之「違反食品登記查驗罪」、(5)要求食品業者投保規範之「違反食品業者投保罪」、(6)要求食品衛生安全之標示之「違反食品安全標示罪」、(7)缺陷食品回收義務之「不履行回收義務罪」等罪之構成要件,詳細論述過失犯、加重結果犯、危險犯,以及食品勞工可能獲得減免刑責事由之「窩裡反」條款,逐一說明。
總之,本文主要針對臺灣關於食品安全之刑事立法,就相關法規作介紹並探討法制面的疑義外,亦提出附屬刑法規定可能導致立法功能不彰,而有無回歸普通刑法的必要,及針對 2013 及 2014 年的最新修法,提出立法上的檢討與建議。
英文關鍵詞: Food SafetyDangerous OffenderOrdinary Criminal CodeSubsidiary Criminal CodePublic Servant Duty
英文摘要: Diet is the most basic sustaining requirement of human life. In modern society, food safety undermined is very usual. The accidents of poison starch of Taiwan caused the general public panic, and doubt on food hygiene and safety. For the sake of effectively protecting the food and safety, the best way is from the legal aspect.
The scope of food hygiene and safety is very vast, including civil law damage, administrative punishment law, confiscated and destroyed, notified to retrieve, nullified the business license or penalty. If there is any damage to food hygiene and, safety, the court will use the criminal law to give punishment. Because of the purpose of criminal law to protect legal interests, people cannot tolerate the food industry to harm the consumers’ safety on lives and health. However, there are many criminal kinds on food hygiene and safety offences; ordinary criminal code cannot cope with them in contents and categories, that’s why we need another subsidiary criminal code (namely, Act Governing Food Sanitation)to protect food safety.
In this paper, we will discuss ordinary criminal code article 191 about offense of manufacture, sale, display impair health commodities, and article 191-1 offense of poisoning the food items. Besides, we will also discuss the “Act Governing Food Sanitation” modified on 2013 and February of 2014, article 49, among others, focusing those points, for example, 1. adulterating, counterfeiting, mixing, adding unauthorized additives, an offense of “unauthorized additives mixed in food”; 2. an offense of “manufacture, sale toxic or harmful food” which violates food additives and packaging materials regulations and other safety norms; 3 violation of any of the advertisement provisions; 4. violation of food-inspection regulations; 5. violating the provisions concerning product liability insurance prescribed by the central competent authority; 6. an offense of “food safety labeling” of which the food businessmen should label food hygiene and safety accurately; 7. incompliance with order by the competent authority to recover defective food. All mentioned above consist of crimes of the constituent elements, negligence committed, guilty of aggravated consequence, dangerous crime, as well as employee assisting the authority to uncover the violation of the employer, the penalty for such employee shall be reduced or exempted, and so on.
In short, this paper mainly discusses criminal legislation of food safety, introducing related law area and exploring the problem on legal side; furthermore, we will discuss if the subsidiary criminal code suitable on legal area and if any possible punishing food product criminal by ordinary law instead of subsidiary code. At last, we will submit a review and suggestion for 2013’s and 2014’s new modification.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、違反食品衛生安全之刑事制裁
一、違反普通刑法之罪
二、違反食品安全衛生管理法之罪
參、違反食品安全論罪上的疑難
一、證明故意犯罪的難題
二、成立過失犯罪的檢驗
三、因果關係的認定
四、保證人地位的來源
五、不法意識的有無
肆、違反食品安全刑事判決之軌跡
一、麥當勞炸油事件
二、毒蠻牛事件
三、甲醛菜脯案
四、便當染菌案
五、魚片中毒案
六、塑化劑事件
七、食用油造假事件
伍、食品安全刑法立法的省思
一、立法體例的選擇
二、修法後的檢驗
三、公務員責任規範的不足
陸、結語
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
返回功能列