法學期刊
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 食安法第 46 條之 1 打擊假新聞犯罪之評析(Comment on the Crime of Fake News according to Paragraph 46a Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation)
編著譯者: 張麗卿
出版日期: 2019.11
刊登出處: 台灣/月旦醫事法報告第 37 期 /68-78 頁
頁  數: 7 點閱次數: 667
下載點數: 28 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 張麗卿
關 鍵 詞: 不實訊息不實廣告食品安全假新聞/假消息謠言
中文摘要: 假新聞或假消息問題近年來在臺灣非常嚴重,尤其自塑化劑、毒澱粉與劣質油品等食品安全風暴接連發生以來,食品議題儼然成為民眾關心的焦點,而食品相關假消息的擴散更是容易引起社會恐懼。一般民眾對於食品安全缺乏認識,資訊來源往往得自媒體或網路,一旦有食品安全疑慮的相關報導,便容易引起眾人恐慌,故此次修法增訂食品安全衛生管理法第 46 條之 1,針對散播有關食品安全之謠言或不實訊息而足生損害於公眾或他人者,設有刑事責任,應能相當程度維護食品安全。不過,該規定仍有食品安全的定義不明確、體例與過往立法不同、僅限處罰自然人,以及適用上可能與食品安全衛生管理法第 28 條混淆之疑慮等。本文認為,針對法人的制裁應可參照德國社交網路執行法的相關規定,方得以周全。
英文關鍵詞: unreal informationuntrue advertisementfood safetyfake newsrumor
英文摘要: The problems about fake news or fake issues is recently serious in Taiwan. In the respect of food safety, the spread of fake news could be the source of fear to the society. It lacks knowing about the food safety by the public, while media or the internet are normally the sources for the knowing to them. Once there was a doubtful report about the food safety, it could lead the public into panic. Therefore, it should protect the food safety to a considerable degree greatly that the paragraph 46a Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation was amended which aimed to against the crime of fake news. Nevertheless, the unclear definition about the food safety, the different structure from the norms in the past, the punishment which only focuses on the legal person, and a possible confusion with the paragraph 28 Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation during its application are the problems for this norm. Comparing with the related norms in Network Enforcement Act in Germany (Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz) could lead a proper result according to the opinion in this article.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、食安法第 46 條之 1 規定
一、維護食品安仝及社會安定之立法目的
二、本罪的適用
參、評析
一、食品安全的定義
二、處罰主體與規範體例
三、不實廣告或標示不實的假訊息
四、借鏡德國社交網路執行法
肆、結語
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
      返回功能列