| 關 鍵 詞： |
食品刑法；集體法益；食品安全；國民健康；抽象危險犯 |
| 中文摘要： |
從 2014 年食品安全衛生管理法在法規名稱內新增安全兩字之後，食品刑法是否也得以保護個人法益以外的集體法益，已成爭議焦點。本文的研究目的在於，找尋集體法益的理論正當性與具體內涵，並從立法論的角度探討食品刑法有無保護正當集體法益的可能性，以期未來重新修法時得以參考。為達此一目的，本文首先耙梳攙偽假冒罪的法益之爭，釐清不同法益詮釋的基礎與侷限何在。次則評介德國不同的集體法益理論，指出正當集體法益內涵的二階段形成準則：首先進行負面審查以排除假性集體法益，次則正面型塑其實質內涵，確認唯有規制社會性集體風險制度的指導理念，始屬正當的集體法益。最終本文主張食品刑法的正當集體法益應僅有食品健康安全性，其具體內涵則是以降低食品消費者從食品而來的社會性集體健康風險為核心，其保護手段則是以各類抽象危險犯來落實。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
food criminal law；collective legal interests；food safety；public health；abstract offense of endangerment |
| 英文摘要： |
Whether or not food-safety-targeted criminal law can be justified by collective legal interests other than individual legal interests has become a center of controversy. After the revision on the title of the Taiwan Food Sanitation and Safety Management Law in 2014, the word of "safety" was added. This study aims atfinding the legitimacy justification and specific content of the collective legal interest on the basis of the theory of legal interest. This will answer the question of whether the criminal law on food regulation may protect any legitimate collective legal interest, and provide comments for future revision.
In order to achieve this purpose, this article first sorts out the dispute between legal interests in the conspiracy to counterfeit and other counterfeit crimes, and clarifies the basis and limitations of the interpretation of different legal interests. Secondly, through the introduction and analysis of the German theory of collective legal interest, the two-stage formation criteria for the connotation of legitimate collective legal interest are pointed out:
1. A negative review is conducted to exclude false collective legal interests;
2. Apositive substantive connotation is formed to confirm that only specific guidelines governing social collective risk systems are legitimate collective legal benefits.
In this regard, it is clear that only "health and safety of the consumers of food" should be the legitimate collective legal interest for food safety criminal law. With this legal interest, criminal food law aims to prevent collective risks forthe health of food consumers. The only instrument for the protection of this collective legal interest is the "abstraktes Gef?hrdungsdelikt".
|
| 目 次： |
壹、導論
貳、攙偽、假冒罪保護法益的學說觀察
一、攙偽、假冒保護法益之爭
二、兩方見解的評析
參、集體法益理論：集體法益的正當性及其實質內涵基礎
一、集體法益的學說觀察
二、本文見解
肆、食品刑法是否具備正當的集體法益？
一、「食品信任」並非食品刑法之集體法益
二、初步正當性：個人對食品產銷市場制度的高度依賴
三、食品刑法之集體法益：「食品健康安全性」
伍、結論
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|