法學期刊
論著名稱: 評新修正洗錢犯罪及實務近期動向(A Review on the Amendment to Money Laundering Offenses: Focusing on the Development of Taiwan’s Criminal Practice)
編著譯者: 許恒達
出版日期: 2019.11
刊登出處: 台灣/國立臺灣大學法學論叢第 48 卷 特刊/1435-1502 頁
頁  數: 68 點閱次數: 1480
下載點數: 272 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 國立臺灣大學法律學院
關 鍵 詞: 洗錢罪特殊洗錢罪人頭帳戶車手司法權限透明金流
中文摘要: 本文討論新修正洗錢防制法後,如何解釋同法第 14 條的普通洗錢罪與第 15 條特殊洗錢罪的問題,並以我國實務上最重要的兩類案例:人頭帳戶提供者與車手是否構成洗錢罪作為中心,以保護法益為中心檢討普通洗錢罪與特殊洗錢罪的合理性,並提出本文對於這兩則罪名的解釋建議:
(1)普通或特殊洗錢罪,均保護前置犯罪的司法權能,此即前置犯罪追訴、定罪、處罰等效果的有效實現;所謂透明金流的保護,僅屬反射利益,而非核心的保護內涵。
(2)普通洗錢罪應該以掩飾隱恐犯罪所得作為基本行為態樣,而移轉、變更、收受、持有、使用犯罪所得均為其具體類型;
(3)特殊洗錢罪則以無特定前置犯罪作為適用前提,其行為必須達到實行各款所要求的異常金融交易行為,否則不成立特殊洗錢罪。
(4)人頭帳戶提供者至多構成移轉型普通洗錢罪的幫助犯,但須以提供者知悉洗錢行為內容為前提。
(5)車手不成立特殊洗錢罪。至若構成詐欺罪幫助犯,則不應再論洗錢罪名,若不成立詐欺罪幫助犯,則可考慮成立收受型洗錢罪。
英文關鍵詞: money launderingspecial money launderingprovider of dummy accountmoney mulejudicial administrationtransparency of cash flow
英文摘要: This article aims to discuss how to interpret the amendment to Money Laundering Control Act (MLCA). Discussion will focus on general money laundering offense (Paragraph 14 MLCA) and special money laundering offense (Paragraph 15 MLCA) together with two important cases in Taiwan’s criminal justice: provider of dummy account as well as money mule. In addition, the author tries to justify the punishment of money laundering on the basis of its protective interests and propose a different point of view for legitimate judicial mechanism applicable to money laundering offenses:
(1) Not only general, but also special money laundering offense protect the judicial administration of the predicate crime with regard to its effective conviction, sentencing and sanction. The transparency of cash flow should not constitute the core ground for the incrimination of money laundering.
(2) ”Disguise or conceal the crime proceeds” should be deemed as the fundamental act of general money laundering offense. Nevertheless, “transfer, transform, acquire, possess or use the crime proceeds” should be defined as an alternative act of “disguising or concealment of the crime proceeds” in terms of general money laundering offense.
(3) Special money laundering offense is not applicable to those cases in which the predicate crime has been confirmed.
(4) ”Dummy account provider” may only constitute the accessory of money laundering through transferring the crime proceeds, if he knows the accomplices will use the dummy account for further transfer of the crime proceeds to escape from criminal investigation.
(5) ”Money mule”, who withdraws the crime proceeds from the bank account, may not commit the special money laundering offense, since the predicate crime has been identified. He may not constitute the general money laundering offense, if his involvement in the commission of the predicate crime, even as an accessory, is confirmed by court. However, he can commit general money laundering offense by possessing the crime proceeds, if he is not involved in commission of the predicate crime.
目  次: 壹、導論
貳、新法的洗錢罪規範內涵
一、規範目的與保護法益
二、擴張普通洗錢罪的處罰範圍
三、增訂特殊洗錢罪
參、修法後的實務發展
一、提供人頭帳戶者
二、取款車手
三、小結
肆、分析檢討新法之洗錢罪
一、保護法益:透明金流 vs 司法權能
二、普通洗錢罪
三、特殊洗錢罪
伍、案例評析
一、人頭帳戶提供者的洗錢刑責
二、取款車手的洗錢刑責
陸、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
    返回功能列