刑事案件舉證責任轉換之研究－以特別背信罪及內線交易之抗辯事由為檢討適例 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)!. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. ‧ er. io. sit. y. Nat. n. A Study on theaReverse Onuses in Criminal Law iv l. n U engchi - Focusing on the Special Breach of Trust and Insider Trading. Ch. ! !.

(2) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v.







(9) !. !. !....................................................................................!1!. !. !........................................................................!3!. !. !..........................................................................................................!8!. !. !.........................................................!15!. !. !..........................................................................!18!. !. !..........................................................................!21!. !. !..................................................................................!23! 治政 !..........................................................................!25! 大 !..................................................................................!37!. !. 立. ! !. ‧ 國 67!. !. y. sit. !..........................................................................!52!. al. n. !. io. !. !..................................................................................!47!. er. !. !..........................................................................!45!. Nat. !. !......................................................................!44!. ‧. !. 學. !. !..................................................................................!42!. Ch. engchi. v. !. !......................................................................................................!143!. !. !............................................................................!147!. !. !.....................................................................................!174!. !. !...............................................................!178!. !. !..................................................!182!. !. !...............................................................!209!. ! ! ! ! !. i Un. !....................................................!99!. "i"!.

(10) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "ii"!. i Un. v.

(11) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "iii"!. i Un. v.

(12) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "iv"!. i Un. v.

(13) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "v"!. i Un. v.

(14) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "vi"!. i Un. v.

(15) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "vii"!. i Un. v.

(16) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "viii"!. i Un. v.

(17) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "ix"!. i Un. v.

(18) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "x"!. i Un. v.

(19) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "xi"!. i Un. v.

(20) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "xii"!. i Un. v.

(21) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. "xiii"!. i Un. v.

(22) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. !. sit er. al. n. !. io. !. y. Nat. !. Ch. engchi. "xiv"!. i Un. v.

(23) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. 1!. i Un. v.


(25) 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 亦即轉換的只. 有提出證據責任. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. 3!. i Un. v.


(27) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1. ! Bock,!Begriff,!Inhalt!und!Zulässigheit!der!Beweislastumkehr!im!materiellen!Strafrecht,!. 2. ! Heine,!Beweislastumkehr!im!Strafverfahren?,!JZ!1995,!s.651.! ! http://readopac3.ncl.edu.tw/nclJournal/search/search.jsp?search_type=sim&la=ch!. 3. !. 5!.

(28) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4. 5. !. ! http://www.lawbank.com.tw! ! http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/Index.htm! 6!. i Un. v.


(30) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 6. ! ! 8 ! 9 !. 2010. 7. 6. ! !. 2 ! 2011 9 12 1 2001 12 — 139"163 ! 95 2007. 9. —. 11. 145. 12. 2010. ! 13 ! 93. 2007. 4. 2. v. ! 2013. 2010. 10. !. engchi. i Un. 1. — 221"237 8!. 9. ! ! ! — 6. 67"75 ! —. !.

(31) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 14. !. 15. 211"218. i Un. v. 106. 2008. 5. !. ! 255 2000 12 60"81 ! ! ( ) 2008 7 1 3"61 ! 17 ! See!Paul!C.!Giannelli,!Understanding!Evidence,!third!edition!2009.! 18 ! See!Kenneth!S.!Brown!&!Walker!J.!Blakey,!Evidence,!3rd!ed.,!2001,!West!Group.! 19 ! See!John!L.!Worral,!Craig!Hemmens,!Criminal!Evidence!An!Introduction,!Roxbury! Publishing!Company,!2005.! 20 ! Rosenberg,!Die!Beweislast,!1965.! 21 ! Feigen,Die!Beweislastumkehr!im!Strafrecht"Geldwäche,!Vermögenseinziehung,!Hehlerei"! de!lege!lata!et!ferenda!1998.! 16. !. 9!.

(32) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 22. !. —. v. — 101. 23. i Un. 2. ! 2012. 24. 6. 19"34 ! — 2012. ! 101. 25. ! 2012 26 !. 6. 84"89. 6. 2"18 ! 101. 2. !. ! 2006. !. ! 1988. !. 58"63 ! 2. —. !. 28. 2. — 99. 27. 2. 101 2012 6 101. 2000. Reverse!Onus 6 29 10!. 3"4. !. 12.

(33) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 29. !. 30. 1. 77"110. ! 31 ! 32 ! 33 ! 34 ! 35 ! 36 !. 2009. ! — —. 2007 2002. 7 1987 2006 12 1996 !. ! 11!. 6. !. ! ! 1 2007. 85"87 !. 164. 12 2003. ! 24"36 5. ! 142.

(34) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Ch. engchi. 37. i Un. v. ! 2012 9 10 1 ! ! 2012 8 ! 39 ! 2000 9 ! 40 ! 101 7 ! 41 ! See!Randy!J.!Holland,!An!Introduction!to!Delaware!Corporation!Law!Directors ! Fiduciary! Duties,! 2008 3 19 92"110 ! 42 ! 172 2009 9 40"74 ! 43 ! 47 1997 10 3"25! 44 ! 7 1977 12 251"278 ! 45 ! 305 2005 2 43"65 ! 46 ! 30 8 2012 8 26"36 ! 38. !. 12!.

(35) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. io. sit. y. Nat. al. n. 47. er. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !. 38. 48. 2009. 49. C h!. 51"66. ! !. engchi. i Un. v. 23. 1. !. 50. 194 1. 69"75. !. !. 51. 2009 13. ! ! 53 ! 54 ! 55 ! 56 ! 2002 57 !. ! 2009. 3. 164"165. 2008 2 2009 6 9 !. 2005 !. 9. !. 2004. 10. ! !. ! 170"173. 2002. 3. !. ! !. 26. 59. !. 11. !. 52. 58. 2002. 2011 13!. 2011 12. 6. 185"242 ! 73"126 !.

(36) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 er. io. sit. y. Nat. n. al. Ch. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 60. !. engchi 2011. 61. i Un. v. 12. 189"230 ! 96 2011 12. ! 115 239"272. 62. !. ! 2011. 63. 12. 273"308. !. !. 96 2011. 1 12 64 !. 309"348 57. 65. ! 66 ! 67 ! 68 ! 196 !. 2012. 3. 2005. 15. ! 12. 8"19. 169"225 ! 2012 9 2011 2012 8 ! ! 14!. 10. 1 !. !.

(37) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 69. !. 70. 114 105"107. 10. !. !. !. 2008. 15 15!. 2011. 6. 153"202 !.

(38) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 71. ! Rosenberg,!Die!Beweislast,!1965,!s.18!ff.!. !. 16!. i Un. v.

(39) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 72. 73. 133. 2006. 6. 9. !. !. !. 2001 17!. 12. 16 !.

(40) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 74. i Un. ! 2001 ! See!Bell!v.!Wolfish,!441!U.S.!520,!99!S.Ct.!1861!(1979).!. 75. !. 18!. v. 12. 23 !.

(41) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 76. i Un. v. ! See!Klause!Volk,!The!Principles!of!Criminal!Procedure!and!Post"Modern!Society:! Contradictions!and!Perspectives,!2006,!p.16.! 77 ! See!In!re!Winship,!397!U.S.!358!(1970).! 78 ! See!Kenneth!Penninton,!“Innocent!Until!Proven!Guilty:!The!Origins!of!a!Legal!Maxim,”!63! THE!JURIST,!2003,!pp.!106"115.! 2011 12 4 ! 79 ! See!Sir!John!Fortescue,Amos’!translation,!De!Laudibus!legume!Angliae! (1470)(Cambridge,1825),p.456. 2011 12 5 ! 80 ! See!United!States!v.!Long,654!F.2d!911!(3d!Cir.!1981).! 81 ! See!In!re!Forfeiture!Hearing!as!to!Caplin!&!Drysdale,837!F.2d!637,643(4th!Cir.!1988). !. !. 19!.

(42) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 82. i Un. v. ! See!Woolmington!v.!DPP![1935]!A.C.!462! ! ! "Throughout!the!web!of!the!English!Criminal!Law!one!golden!thread!is!always!to!be!seen! that!it!is!the!duty!of!the!prosecution!to!prove!the!prisoner's!guilt!subject!to...!the!defence!of! insanity!and!subject!also!to!any!statutory!exception.!If,!at!the!end!of!and!on!the!whole!of!the! case,!there!is!a!reasonable!doubt,!created!by!the!evidence!given!by!either!the!prosecution!or! the!prisoner...!the!prosecution!has!not!made!out!the!case!and!the!prisoner!is!entitled!to!an! acquittal.!No!matter!what!the!charge!or!where!the!trial,!the!principle!that!the!prosecution! must!prove!the!guilt!of!the!prisoner!is!part!of!the!common!law!of!England!and!no!attempt!to! whittle!it!down!can!be!entertained."! 84 ! 55 2004 2 128 ! 85 ! See!Coffin!v.!United!States,156!U.S.!432!(1895);Joseph!C.Cascarelli,!Presumption!of! Innocence!and!Natural!Law:!Machiavelli!and!Aquinas,!41!Am3!J.!Juris.!229,231!(1996).! 86 ! See!3!Simon!Greenleaf,!A!Treatise!on!the!Law!of!Evidence!31!n.1(Boston!1842).! 87 ! See!Bell!v.!Wolfish,441!U.S.!520,533!(1979).! 83. !. 20!.

(43) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 88. i Un. v. ! See!James!B.!Thayer,!The!Presumption!of!Innocence!in!Criminal!Cases,!6!Yale!L.!J.!185,!187! (1896).! 89 ! Rolf"Jürgen!Köster,!Die!Rechtsvermutung!der!Unschuld!1"8(1979)! 90 ! See!Harold!J.!Berman,!The!Presumption!of!Innocence:!Another!Reply,!28!AM.!J.!Comp.!L.,! 1980,!pp.615"622.! 91 ! — 2006 !. !. 21!.

(44) 治政留之範圍，不問是否屬於刑事被告身分，均受上開規定之保障大立. 凡限制人民身體自由之處置，在一定限度內為憲法保. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 93. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 92. ! See!John!A.!Andrews,!Human!Right!in!Criminal!Procedure!26!(Martinus!Nijhoff! publishers) — 2008 7 185 8 ! 93 ! 2005 9 126 271 25 4 4. !. 22!.

(45) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 94. ! !. 95. !. 14. 2010. 6. 23!. 1995 199. 6. !. 51. !.

(46) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2015 2015 3 11 ! 96 ! vgl.!Friedrich"Christian!Schröder,!Strafprozeßrecht,1993.!Nr.336.! 97 ! 45 5 14 ! 98 ! 2001 8 352 !. 24!. 3. 11. 1999 !. 5.

(47) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 99. !. i Un. v. 7. 2002. 12. 10 ! ! vgl.!Kleinknecht/Meyer"Gossner,!Strafprozessordnung,!41.!Aufl.,!1993,§112a Rn.1.! 101 ! 2007 9 1 352 50 2006 12 101 ! 100. !. 25!.

(48) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 102. !. 18 !. engchi. — 2012 26!. 12. i Un. v. 99. !.

(49) 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大 103. ‧. n. Ch. i Un 104. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 103. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. v. ! vgl.!Schulenburg,!Johanna,!Das!Verbot!der!vorweggenommenen!Beweiswuerdigung!im! Strafprozess,!2002.!S.48!ff.! 104 ! — — 101 2 101 2 2012 6 60 !. !. 27!.

(50) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 105. ! EComHR,!X!v.!Austria,!Decision!of!01/06/1967!Appl.!No!.2291/64.! ! S.!Trechsel,!Human!Rights!in!Criminal!Proceedings,!2005,p.167"191. — 145 2010 2 1 56 ! 107 !. 106. —. ! !. 28!.

(51) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 111. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 108. ! EComHR,!Austria!v.!Italy,!1963,!6!Yearbook!740,!at!784,!Appl.!No.!778/60.! ! ECHR,!Lavents!v.!Lativia,!Judgment!of!28/11/2002,!Appl.!No.!58442/00.! 110 ! ECHR,!Funke!v.!France,!1993,!Series!A!no.256"A.! 111 ! 95 2007 68 ! 109. !. 29!. 6.

(52) 112. 刑事被告一律有權平等享受不得強迫自供或認罪之保障. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 112. !. 38. ! ! vgl.!Löwe"Rosenberg/Gollwitzer(LR"Gollwitzer),!Großkommentar!der!stop!25!neub.!Aufl.,! 2000.,!Ein1.!I.,89ff.! 114 ! 2010 6 156 ! 115 ! — — 93 2007 4 222 ! 116 See!Schmerber!v.!California!384!U.S.!757,764!(1966) 2010 113. !. 30!.

(53) 國家被禁止強制被告以主動積極方式來配合對己的刑事追訴. 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. n. iv n C !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! U heng i h c 9 375 117. 95. 2007. 6. 69. !. — — 93 2007 4 226 ! 118 See!Charles!H.!Whitebread!&!Christopher!Slobogin,!Criminal!Procedure,!p.357.! (Foundation!Press,1993).! 119 95 2007 6 70 ! 120 ! See!Holt!v.!United!States,218!U.S.!245!(1910).,!Schmerber!v.!California,!384!U.S.!757,! 763"764!(1966).! 121 ! See!U.S.!v.!Wade,!388!U.S.!218!(1967).! ! 122 ! See!Gilbert!v.!California,!388!U.S.!263!(1973).! ! 123 ! See!United!States!v.!Dionisio,!410!U.S.!1!(1967).! ! 124 ! See!In!re!Doe,!860!F.2d!40,46!(2d!Cir.!1988);!United!States!v.!Thomann,!609!F.2d!560,562! (1st!Cir.!1979);!In!re!Maguire,!571!F.2d!675,677!(1st!Cir.)!cert,!denied,!436!U.S.!911!(1978).! !. 31!.

(54) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. Nat. sit. y. 在未涉及對人的自由意志的侵害下，賦予被告消極忍. n. al. er. io. 受的義務，尚無不妥. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 125. i Un. v. ! See!United!States!v.!Maceo,!873!F.2d!1!(1st!Cir.),!cert.!denied,!493!U.S.!840!(1989);!State! v.!Asherman,!193!Conn.!695;!710"714,478!A.2d!227,239"240!(1984),!cert.!denied,!470!U.S.! 1050!(1985).! 126 ! See!McKenna!v.!State,!671!S.W.2d!138!(Tex.!App.!1984).! 127 ! See!California!v.!Byers,!402!U.S.424!(1971)! 128 ! See!Doe!v.!United!States,!487!U.S.!201,210!(1988).! 129 ! See!Rogers!v.!United!States,340!U.S.!367!(1951).!. !. 32!.

(55) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 130. i Un. v. ! See!John!W.!Strong,!McCormick!on!Evidence!213!(West!Publishing,!4th!1992).;Jack!B.! Mansfield,!Norman!Abrams!&!Margaret!A.!Berger,!Evidence!1360!(Foundation!Press,!1990).! 131 ! 34 1 2005 1 51 ! 132 ! 164 2009 1 93 !. !. 33!.

(56) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 133. !. i Un. v. 135. 101. 2. ! ! Frisch,Zum!Wesen!des!Grundsatzes!„in!dubio!pro!reo”,Henkel"FS,1974,s274.! 135 ! 106 2008 5 212 ! 136 ! ( ) 2008 7 1 21 !. 134. !. 34!.

(57) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 137. !. i Un. v. 255 2000 12 64 2003 8 50 55 50 105;Beulke,Strafprozessrecht,7.Aufl.,2004,(Fn.43),Rn.25 ! 138 ! 244 2 Das!Gericht!hat!zur!Erforschung!der!Wahrheit!die!Beweisaufnahme!von!Amts!wegen! auf!alle!Tatsachen!und!Beweismittel!zu!erstrecken,!die!für!die!Entscheidung!von!Bedeutung! sind.! 139 ! 53 1999 10 182 2001 69 2 1999 6 88 ! 20. !. 35!.

(58) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 er. io. sit. y. Nat. n. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 140. !. 2 !. 2007. 12. 99. i Un. v. 9 ! 36!.


(60) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 141. i Un. v. ! Everyone!charged!with!a!criminal!offence!shall!be!presumed!innocent!until!proved!guilty! according!to!law.! 142 ! EComHR,!Austria!v.!Italy,!1963,!6!Yearbook!740.Appl.!no.!778/60.!. !. 38!.

(61) 內國倘若將舉證責任予以治政轉換，未必違反無罪推定原則大立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 143. i Un. v. ! ECHR,!Barberà,!Messegué!and!Jabardo!v.!Spain,!Judgment!of!6/12/1988,!Appl.!no.!146.! ! ECHR,!Telfner!v.!Austria,!Judgment!of!20/3/2001,!Appl.!no.!33501/96.! 145 ! ECHR,!Salabiaku!v.!France,!1988,!Series!A!no.!141.! 144. !. 39!.

(62) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 147 148. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 146. ! ECHR,!Pham!Hoang!v.!France,!1992,!Series!A!no.!243.! ! — — 101 2 2012 6 47 ! 148 ! StPO!244(2)!Das Gericht hat zur Erforschung der Wahrheit die Beweisaufnahme von Amts wegen auf alle Tatsachen und Beweismittel zu erstrecken, die für die Entscheidung von Bedeutung sind. 232 2 Er ist verpflichtet, die Ermittelung der Wahrheit zu fördern, 147. !. 40!.

(63) 149. 150. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! und hat dafür zu sorgen, daß Erörterungen unterbleiben, die die Hauptverhandlung ohne Nutzen für die Aufklärung der Sache verzögern würden. 6 1 The criminal justice authorities shall investigate ex officio all the circumstances relevant to the assessment of the criminal act and the accused. 2 They shall investigate the incriminating and exculpating circumstances with equal care. 81 1 The investigating judge undertakes in accordance with the law any investigative step he deems useful for the discovery of the truth. He seeks out evidence of innocence as well as guilt.! 149 ! vgl.!Satzger,!internationals!und!Europäsches Strafrecht, 5 Aufl., 2011,§11 Rn. 74.! 150 ! 2010 6 25 ! 151 ! vgl.!Kühne,!Strafprozessrecht,!8.!Aufl.,!2010,!§17 Rn. 301.! 152 ! — — 145 2010 2 1 148 ! !. 41!.

(64) 學 ‧. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. 158. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 153. i Un. ! Article!2.1,!Green!Paper!The!Presumption!of!Innocence.! ! Article!2.2,!Green!Paper!The!Presumption!of!Innocence.! 155 ! Article!2.3,!Green!Paper!The!Presumption!of!Innocence.! 156 ! Article!2.4,!Green!Paper!The!Presumption!of!Innocence.! 157 ! Murray!v.!United!Kingdom,!N.1873!1/91(8!February!1996).! 158 ! 55 2004 2 127 ! 154. !. 42!. v.

(65) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 但當被告被諭知有罪判決，不論判決是否業已確定，無罪推定均已被推翻，被告縱然提起上訴，亦不得再行主張無罪推定. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 159. ! See!David!W.!Neubauer,!America’s!Court!and!the!Criminal!Justice!System!p.378"379! (2008)! 160 ! See!Ross!v.!Moffitt,417!U.S.!600,610!(1974).! 161 ! See!State!v.!Carter,121!S.W.3d!579,579!(Tenn.2003).! 162 ! See!McKane!v.!Durston,!153!U.S.!684,687"88!(1894).! 163 ! See!Pennsylvania!v.!Finley,!481!U.S.!551,555"56!(1987).! 164 ! 13 2013 1 170. !. 43!.

(66) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 93. 2007. — 228. 4. — —. 2006. 165. 24. !. ! 207. !. 2012 44!. 9. 72. !.

(67) 政治大. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be. 立. presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. ! ! ! !. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. ! ! ! ! !. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 166. !. !. 2010. 45!. 5. 25. A15. !.

(68) 被告提出幾個抗辯，就會產生幾個審判. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 167. i Un. v. ! 1984 3 6 ! ! See!M.!Carr!Ferguson,!Day!in!Court!in!Justinians’s!Rome:!Some!Problems!of!Evidence,! Proof,!and!Justice!in!Roman!Law,!46!Iowa!L.!Rev.!732,!763!(1961).! 169 ! 2006 12 7 ! 170 ! 2004 11 28 ! 171 ! 2004 11 30 ! 168. !. 46!.

(69) 主張積極爭點的當事人必須證明其所主張的事實為真. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 172. i Un. v. ! See!Daniel!M.!Reaugh,!Presumptions!and!the!Burden!of!Proof,!36!Ill.!L.!Rev.!705"706! (1942).!. !. 47!.

(70) 舉證責任之分配須考量三個因素（有論者稱此為三個Ｐ）分別是：政策 (policy) 、證據之擁有 (possession of evidence)以及舉證可能性(probabilities). 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 173. i Un. v. ! See!Paul!C.!Giannelli,!Understanding!Evidence,!third!edition!2009,!p.45.! ! See!Cleary,!Presuming!and!Pleading:!An!Essay!on!Juristic!Immaturity,!12!Stan.!L.!Rev.!5! (1959).! 175 ! See!Campbell!v.!United!States,!365!U.S.!85,!96!(1961).!. 174. !. 48!.

(71) 加州證據法並未將舉證責任限定在擔任控方的檢察官身上，提出主張之一方即負有舉證責任，只是對於雙方所要求的證明程度，依照待證事實之不同以及其身份而有所不同而已. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 176. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. ! CEC!,§110(Burden!of!producing!evidence):!"Burden!of!producing!evidence"!means!the! obligation!of!a!party!to!introduce!evidence!sufficient!to!avoid!a!ruling!against!him!on!the! issue.! 177 ! CEC,!§115(Burden!of!proof):!"Burden!of!proof"!means!the!obligation!of!a!party!to! establish!by!evidence!a!requisite!degree!of!belief!concerning!a!fact!in!the!mind!of!the!trier!of! fact!or!the!court.! 178 ! CEC,!§500,!Except!as!otherwise!provided!by!law,!a!party!has!the!burden!of!proof!as!to! each!fact!the!existence!or!nonexistence!of!which!is!essential!to!the!claim!for!relief!or! defense!that!he!is!asserting.! 179 ! CEC,!§115(Burden!of!proof):The!burden!of!proof!may!require!a!party!to!raise!a! reasonable!doubt!concerning!the!existence!or!nonexistence!of!a!fact!or!that!he!establish!the! existence!or!nonexistence!of!a!fact!by!a!preponderance!of!the!evidence,!by!clear!and! convincing!proof,!or!by!proof!beyond!a!reasonable!doubt.!Except!as!otherwise!provided!by! law,!the!burden!of!proof!requires!proof!by!a!preponderance!of!the!evidence.! 180 ! California!Penal!Code,§1096(Presumption!of!Innocence!and!Reasonable!Doubt):!A! defendant!in!a!criminal!action!is!presumed!to!be!innocent!until!the!contrary!is!proved,!and!in! case!of!a!reasonable!doubt!whether!his!or!her!guilt!is!satisfactorily!shown,!he!or!she!is! entitled!to!an!acquittal,!but!the!effect!of!this!presumption!is!only!to!place!upon!the!state!the!. !. 49!.

(72) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! burden!of!proving!him!or!her!guilty!beyond!a!reasonable!doubt.!Reasonable!doubt!is!defined! as!follows:!"It!is!not!a!mere!possible!doubt;!because!everything!relating!to!human!affairs!is! open!to!some!possible!or!imaginary!doubt.!It!is!that!state!of!the!case,!which,!after!the!entire! comparison!and!consideration!of!all!the!evidence,!leaves!the!minds!of!jurors!in!that! condition!that!they!cannot!say!they!feel!an!abiding!conviction!of!the!truth!of!the!charge."! 181 CEC,§550:!(a)!The!burden!of!producing!evidence!as!to!a!particular!fact!is!on!the!party! against!whom!a!finding!on!that!fact!would!be!required!in!the!absence!of!further!evidence.(b)! The!burden!of!producing!evidence!as!to!a!particular!fact!is!initially!on!the!party!with!the! burden!of!proof!as!to!that!fact.! 182 ! See!Kenneth!S.!Brown!&!Walker!J.!Blakey,!Evidence,!p.220,!3rd!ed.,!2001,!West!Group;! McCormick!on!Evidence,!§336,!5th!ed.!2001,!West!Group.! 183 ! Rosenberg,!Die!Beweislast,!1965,!s.3.!. !. 50!.

(73) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 184. i Un. v. ! Feigen,Die!Beweislastumkehr!im!Strafrecht"Geldwäche,!Vermögenseinziehung,!Hehlerei"! de!lege!lata!et!ferenda!1998,!s.28.! 185 ! 133 2006 6 15 ! 186 ! vgl.!Gottwald,!Grundprobleme!der!Beweislastverteilung,!Jura!1980,!s.225.!. !. 51!.

(74) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. n. 說服責任自始至終都在檢察官身 iv n C h從上，不能轉換到被告身上， e而 n g說c服h責i 任U並不存在舉證責任轉換（shift of burden）的問題. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 187. ! See!Richard!May,!Criminal!Evidence,!4th!ed.!Sweet!&!Maxwell,!1999,!p.60.!. 188. 55. 2004. 2. 115. !. 189. ! See!John!W.!Strong!,McCormick!on!Evidence,!§336,!5th!ed.!2001,!West!Group.;!Kenneth!S.!. Brown!&!Walker!J.!Blakey,!Evidence,!3rd!ed.,!2001,!West!Group.!p.220.! !. 52!.

(75) 190. 191. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. i Un. v. 190! John!L.!Worral,!Craig!Hemmens,!Criminal!Evidence!An!Introduction,!Roxbury!Publishing! Company,!2005,!p.52.! 191 ! A!prima!facie!showing!means!having!enough!evidence!to!justify!submission!of!the!matter! to!the!jury!if!unchallenged!by!the!other!side.!It!is!also!called!burden!of!going!forward.! An!Introduction!to!Criminal!Evidence"A!Casebook!Approach,!R.Alan!Thompson/Lisa!S.! Nored/John!L.!Worrall/!Craig!Hemmens,!New!York!Oxford!University!Press,!2008,!p.61.! 192 ! See!Jayasena!v.!R[1970]!AC!618,p.624.! 193 ! See!Kenneth!S.!Brown!&!Walker!J.!Blakey,!Evidence,!p.220,!3rd!ed.,!2001,!West!Group;! McCormick!on!Evidence,!§336,!5th!ed.!2001,!West!Group.!. !. 53!.

(76) 立. 倘若被告. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 y. Nat. 被告提出積極抗辯（affirmative. sit. 選擇沈默. 政治大. n. al. er. io. defense）時，提出責任便轉換到被告身上. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 194. ! See!Martin!v.!Ohio,480!U.S.!228,230!(1987)! !. 195. !. 54!. 133. 27. !.

(77) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 196. i Un. v. ! See!Frazier!v.!Weatherholtz,!572!F.2d!994,995! ! See!Paul!H.!Robinson,!Criminal!Law!Defense!4(a),!20!N.7!(1984)!. 197. !. 55!.

(78) 因對被告有利且被告本身方對此有所特殊認識. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 198. i Un. v. ! Carlifornia!Evidence!Code,!115:!Burden!of!proof"!means!the!obligation!of!a!party!to! establish!by!evidence!a!requisite!degree!of!belief!concerning!a!fact!in!the!mind!of!the!trier!of! fact!or!the!court.!The!burden!of!proof!may!require!a!party!to!raise!a!reasonable!doubt! concerning!the!existence!or!nonexistence!of!a!fact!or!that!he!establish!the!existence!or! nonexistence!of!a!fact!by!a!preponderance!of!the!evidence,!by!clear!and!convincing!proof,!or! by!proof!beyond!a!reasonable!doubt.Except!as!otherwise!provided!by!law,!the!burden!of! proof!requires!proof!by!a!preponderance!of!the!evidence.! 199. 55 !. 2004. 2. 112. ! 56!.

(79) 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學 ‧. 203. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 200. i Un. v. ! Elizabeth!Stoffelmayr!&!Shai!Seidman!Diamond,!The!Conflict!between!Precision!and! Flexibility!in!Explaining!“Beyond!a!Reasonable!Doubt”,!6!PSYCHOL.,!PUB!POL’Y,!&!L.!769,774! (2000). 101 2 2012 6 23 17 ! 201 ! See!People!v.!Laitta,!30!N.Y.!2d!68!(1972)! 202 ! See!Martin!v.!Ohio,480!U.S.!228,230!(1987)! 203 ! See!Bourjaily!v.!United!States,!483!U.S.!171,175!(1987)!. !. 57!.

(80) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 204. v. ! See!Riley!Hill!General!Contractor,!Inc.!v.!Tandy!Corp.,!737!P.2d!595!(Or.!1987).;!Addington! v.!Texas,!441!U.S.!418,!424"25!(1979).! 205 ! 8!U.S.C.!§17(a)!(clear!and!convincing!proof!required!for!insanity!defense!acquittal!in! federal!trails).! ! 206 ! See!Addintong!v.!Texas,441!U.S.!418,433!(1979).!similar!cases Woodby!v.!INS,385!U.S.! 276,28!5(1966);!Chaunt!v.!United!States,!364!U.S.!350,353!(1960).! 207 ! See!In!re!Winship,!397!U.S.358!(1970).! 208 ! See!Taylor!v.!Kentucky,!436!U.S.!478!(1978).!. 209. ! ! similar!case:!Speiser!v.!Randall,!357!U.S.!513,525"26!(1958).!. 210. !. 58!.

(81) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學合理懷疑不僅是. Nat. sit. y. 可能的懷疑，因為與人類相關的一切事物以及仰賴道德證據者，都具. n. al. er. io. 有許多可能或是想像的懷疑. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 211. i Un. v. ! See!Holland!v.!United!States,!348!U.S.!121,140!(1954).! ! See!Miles!v.!United!States,!103!U.S.!304,312!(1881);!Hopt!v.!Utah,!120!U.S.!430,440"41! (1987).! 213 ! See!Victor!v.!Nebraska,114!S.!Ct.!1239,!1242!(1994).! 214 ! See!Shapiro,!Barbara!J.!Beyond!Reasonable!Doubt!and!Probable!Cause:!Historical! Perspectives!on!the!Anglo"American!Law!of!Evidence.!Berkeley:!University!of!California!Press,! c1991,p.4.! 215 ! See!Commenwealth!v.!Webster,!59!Mass.!295,320!(1850).! 216 ! See!Victor!v.!Nebraska,114!S.!Ct.!1239,!1244!(1994).! 217 ! See!Hopt!v.!Utah,!120!U.S.430,440!(1887).! 212. !. 59!.

(82) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 218. i Un. v. ! See!Cage!v.!Louisiana,498!U.S.!39!(1990).! ! See!Sullivan!v.!Louisiana,!113!S.!Ct.!2078,2082!(1993).! 220 ! See!Kentucky!v.!Whorton,!441!U.S.!786,!789!(1979).! 221 ! See!Regina!v.!Summers,!36!Crim.!App.!14!(Eng.1952).;!Regina!v.!Ching,!63!Crim.!App.!7,! 10!(Eng.!1976).! 222 See!Regina!v.!Gebert,!(1992)!60!S.A.!St.!R.!110,!1992!AUST!SASA!LEXIS!461,!AT!21!(AUSTL.! 1992).! 223 ! See!Regina!v.!Brydon!(1995),!95!C.C.C.(3d)!509,511!(Wood,!J.A.,!dissenting).! 219. !. 60!.

(83) 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大 224. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 224. i Un. v. ! See!Mullaney!v.!Wilbur,421!U.S.!684!(1975)! ! See!In!re!Winship,!397!U.S.358!(1970).! 226 ! The$Maine$murder$statute,!Me.Rev.Stat.Ann.,!Tit.!17,!§!2651!(1964),!provides:'Whoever! unlawfully!kills!a!human!being!with!malice!aforethought,!either!express!or!implied,!is!guilty! of!murder!and!shall!be!punished!by!imprisonment!for!life.'The$manslaughter$statute,! Me.Rev.Stat.Ann.,!Tit.!17,!§!2551!(1964),!in!relevant!part!provides:'Whoever!unlawfully!kills! a!human!being!in!the!heat!of!passion,!on!sudden!provocation,!without!express!or!implied! malice!aforethought!.!.!.!shall!be!punished!by!a!fine!of!not!more!than!$1,000!or!by! imprisonment!for!not!more!than!20!years!.!.!..'! 227 ! See!Patterson!v.!New!York,432!U.S.197!(1977).!. 225. !. 61!.

(84) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 228. i Un. v. ! See!In!re!Winship,!397!U.S.358!(1970).! ! See!Martin!v.!Ohio,480!U.S.!228!(1987).! 230 ! Ohio!Revised!Code§2901.05!(Burden!of!proof!"!reasonable!doubt!"!self"defense.)(A)!Every! person!accused!of!an!offense!is!presumed!innocent!until!proven!guilty!beyond!a!reasonable! doubt,!and!the!burden!of!proof!for!all!elements!of!the!offense!is!upon!the!prosecution.!The! burden!of!going!forward!with!the!evidence!of!an!affirmative!defense,!and!the!burden!of! proof,!by!a!preponderance!of!the!evidence,!for!an!affirmative!defense,!is!upon!the!accused.! 231 ! See!atterson!v.!New!York,432!U.S.197!(1977).! 232 ! Where!in!any!proceedings!against!a!person!for!an!offence!under!the!Prevention!of! Corruption!Act,!1906,!or!the!Public!Bodies!Corrupt!Practices!Act,!1889,!it!is!proved!that!any! money,!gift,!or!other!consideration!has!been!paid!or!given!to!or!received!by!a!person!in!the! employment!of!His!Majesty!or!any!Government!Department!or!a!public!body!by!or!from!a! person,!or!His!Majesty!or!any!Government!Department!or!public!body,!the!money,!gift,!or! consideration!shall!be!deemed!to!have!been!paid!or!given!and!received!corruptly!as!such! inducement!or!reward!as!is!mentioned!in!such!Act!unless!the!contrary!is!proved.! 229. !. 62!.

(85) 立. 政治大除了性犯罪法曾經. ‧ 國. 學. 受到違反被告人權或歐洲人權公約之疑慮外，其他並未受到有害人權 233. ‧. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. ! Any!person!who!without!lawful!authority!or!reasonable!excuse!the!proof!whereof!shall! lie!on!him,!has!with!him!in!any!public!place!any!offensive!weapon!shall!be!guilty!of!an! offence,!and!shall!be!liable.! 234 ! For!the!purposes!of!this!section!a!man!who!lives!with!or!is!habitually!in!the!company!of! prostitute,!or!who!exercises!control,!direction!or!influence!over!a!prostitute’s!movements!in! a!way!which!shows!he!is!aiding,!abetting!or!compelling!her!prostitution!with!others,!shall!be! presumed!to!be!knowingly!living!on!the!earings!of!prostitution,!unless!he!proves!the! contrary.! 235 ! See!Dunbar![1958]!1!Q.B.1:Dix!(1982)!74!Cr.App.!R.306! 236 ! Subject!to!subsection!(3)!below,!in!any!proceedings!for!an!offence!to!which!this!section! applies!it!shall!be!a!defence!for!the!accused!to!prove!that!he!neither!knew!of!nor!suspected! nor!had!reason!to!suspect!the!existence!of!some!fact!alleged!by!the!prosecution!which!it!is! necessary!for!the!prosecution!to!prove!if!he!is!to!be!convicted!of!the!offence!charged.! 237 ! (2)In!any!proceedings!in!which!by!virtue!of!this!section!a!person!other!than!the!accused! is!proved!to!have!been!convicted!of!an!offence!by!or!before!any!court!in!the!United!Kingdom! or!any!other!member!State!or!by!a!Service!court!outside!the!United!Kingdom,!he!shall!be! taken!to!have!committed!that!offence!unless!the!contrary!is!proved.! ! ! (3)In!any!proceedings!where!evidence!is!admissible!of!the!fact!that!the!accused!has! committed!an!offence,!...!,!if!the!accused!is!proved!to!have!been!convicted!of!the!offence—! ! ! ! ! (a)by!or!before!any!court!in!the!United!Kingdom!or!any!other!member!State;!or! ! ! ! ! (b)by!a!Service!court!outside!the!United!Kingdom,he!shall!be!taken!to!have!committed! that!offence!unless!the!contrary!is!proved.! 238 ! It!is!a!defense!for!a!person!charged!with!an!offence!under!subsection!(1)(b)!above!to! prove!that!at!the!time!he!is!alleged!to!have!committed!the!offence!the!circumstances!were! such!that!there!was!no!likelihood!of!his!driving!the!vehicle!whilst!the!proportion!of!alcohol!in! his!breath,!blood!or!urine!remained!likely!to!exceed!the!prescribed!limit.!. !. Ch. engchi. 63!. i Un. v.

(86) 之挑戰，可見舉證責任非謂不得倒置到被告身上. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. i Un. v. 239! Where!the!defendant!to!an!information!or!complaint!relies!for!his!defense!on!any! exception,!exemption,!proviso,!excuse!or!qualification,!whether!or!not!it!accompanies!the! description!of!the!offence!or!matter!of!complaint!in!the!enactment!creating!the!offence!or! on!which!the!complaint!is!founded,!the!burden!or!proving!the!exception,!exemption,!proviso,! excuse!or!qualification!shall!be!on!him;!and!this!notwithstanding!that!the!information!or! complaint!contains!an!allegation!negativing!the!exception,!exemption,!proviso,!excuse!or! qualification.! 240 ! See!Hunt[1987]!A.C.352!at!385. Lord!Acknern ! 241 ! See!Lego!v.!Twomey,404!U.S.!477!(1972)!. !. 64!.

(87) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 242. i Un. v. ! See!In!re!Winship,!397!U.S.358!(1970).! ! See!Frank!R.!Hermann!&!Brownlow!M.!Speer,!Facing!the!Accuser:Ancient!and!Medieval! Prrecursors!of!the!Confrontation!Clause,!34!Vir.!J.!of!Int’l!L.!481,!522(1994).! 1992 187 2010 9 683 ! 244 2010 9 684 !. 243. !. 65!.


(89) 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 任. ‧. 檢察官對於被告之犯罪事實，自應負提出證據及說服之實質舉證責. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 檢察官除應盡提出證據之形式舉證責任外，尚須指出證明之方法，以之說服法院，使法官確信被告有犯罪之事實. !. 67!.

(90) 倘其證明之程度，尚有合理之懷疑存在時，即不能據為被告有罪之認定被告得就被訴事實指出有利之證明方法，係賦予被告主動實施防禦之權利，以貫徹當事人對等原則，並非將檢察官應負之舉證責任轉換予被告. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. 68!. i Un. v.

(91) 最高法院 25 年上字第 3706 號判例. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 er. io. sit. y. Nat. n. 最高法院 61a年台上字第 2477 號判例. iv l C n hengchi U. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 245. ! !. !. 246. 247. 28 7. 175. !. !. 248. ! !. 249. 133 64. 2006 !. 6. 9. !. 2962 !. !. 69!. 4. 1999.

(92) 77 年第 11 次刑事庭. 司法院釋字第 238 號大法官解釋. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 78 年度第 3 次刑事庭決議. 按之現今外國立法例，並無類似我刑事訴訟法第三百七十九條第十款之規定，將之列為 !. 70!.

(93) 絕對的上訴理由。. 而審判期日依刑事訴訟法第二百八十八條規定『訊問被告後審判長應調查證據』，而不及蒐集證據，是蒐集證據應為準備審判程序中所為之訴訟行為，為事實審受命推事之職責既明定於審判期日應調查之證據未予調查，當然不及於準備審判程序中之蒐集證據. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 sit. y. Nat. io. n. al. er. 最高法院 87 年度台非字第 1 號判決. Ch. engchi. i Un. 最高法院 91 年第 4 次刑事庭決議. !. 71!. v.

(94) 始有調查證據之義務. 本法第一百六十三條第二項前段『法院得依職權調查證據』，係指法院. 政治大. 於當事人主導之證據調查完畢後，認為事實未臻明白仍有待澄清時，. 立. 得斟酌具體個案之情形，無待聲請，主動依職權調查之謂。. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 惟於法院「得」依職權調查證據之情形，法院既得參酌個案，而有決定是否補充介入調查之裁量空間. !. 72!.

(95) 最高法院 100 年第 4 次刑事庭決議. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. 73!. i Un. v.

(96) 政治大. 最高法院 100 年度台上字第 6259 號判決. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 101 年第 2 次刑事庭決議. !. 74!.

(97) 依目的性限縮之解釋，應以利益被告之事項為限，. 3706. $. 2477. 77. 11. !. $. $. !. $. io. 4. y. 1. !. sit. 87. $. ‧. 3. !. !. Nat. 78. 91. $. 立. n. al. er. 238. $. 政 !治大. 學. 61. ‧ 國. 25. 100. 6259. $. 100. 4. $. 101. 2. $. Ch. n U e n g c! h i. iv. !. ! !. 原則上只有國家機關有權追訴及審判犯罪 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 250. !. !. ! 75!.

(98) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. al. sit. y. Nat 最高法院 76 年度台上字第 4986 號判例. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 須於通常一般之人均不至有所懷疑，而得確信其為真實之程度者，始得據為有罪之認定. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 251. ! See!Mirjan!Damaska,!Presentation!of!Evidence!and!Factfinding!Precision,!123!U.!Pa.!L.!. Rev.!1083,1089"1090!(1975).! 252 ! 101 2 !. —. — 2012 76!. 6. 7. !.

(99) 若經為必要之調查，其所獲得之證據資料，仍不足為該被告有罪之論證時，即應為無罪之諭知. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 253. i Un. v. ! See!Sward,!Values,!Ideologh,!and!the!Evolution!of!the!Adversary!System,!64!Ind.!L.J.!301,! 312(1989).! 254 ! See!Landsman,!The!Adversary!System:A!Description!and!Defense!45(1984).! 255 ! 1997 8 126 1992 12 1994 244 !. !. 77!.

(100) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 256. 257. ! vgl.!Baur/Grunsky:Zivilprozessrecht,9!Aufl.!1997,!Rz!36f.!. ! See!Mirjan!Damaska,!Presentation!of!Evidence!and!Factifinding!Precision,!123!U.!Pa.!L.!. Rev.!1083,1090!(1975).! !. 258. 2011. 9. 12. 1. 20. 259. !. ! See!Sward,!Values,!Ideolog,!and!the!Evolution!of!the!Adversary!System,!64!Ind.!L.J.!301,!. 307(1989) Landsman,!The!Adversary!System:A!Description!and!Defense!46!(1984). 260 ! See!Landsman,!The!Adversary!System:A!Description!and!Defense!44!(1984).! !. 78!.

(101) 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 對於對被告有利的證據，未必須告知辯護律師該證據之. ‧. 存在，更無須在審判中提出對被告有利之證據，只有在對造律師要求. sit. y. Nat. 閱覽特定證據，且該證據對有罪無罪有重大關係，或對被告有利時，. io. n. al. er. 檢察官始須將系爭證據供被告辯護人閱覽. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 261. ! See!McCormick,!McCormick!on!Evidence!§188,288!(1984).!. 262. ! See!Gross,!The!American!Advantage:!The!Value!of!Inefficirnt!Litigation,85!Mich.!L.!Rev.! 734,746,752!(1987).! 263 !. 44 2 1999 4 18"21 See!Gary!Goodpaster,!On!the!Theory!of!American!Adversary!Criminal!Trial,!78!J.!Crim.!L.!&! Criminology!118,!120"121(1987);!William!T.!Pizzi,!Understanding!Prosecutorial!Discretion!in! the!United!States:!The!Limits!of!Comparative!Criminal!Procedure!as!an!Instrument!of!Reform,! 54!Ohio!St.!L.J.!1325,1354"1355!(1993). 2013 9 2 9 26 ! 264 ! 2013 9 2 10 ! !. 79!.

(102) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 265. !. 4. 1993 10 1997 8. 2010 9 8. 61 7. 6. v. 1999. 6. 404 41. —. 1997. 2010 9 8 5 393 ! 266 ! See!Tehan!v.!United!States,!382!U.S.!406,416!(1966).! !. i Un. 80!. 11. 430 2002. 8.

(103) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 267. ! ! 269 !. 268. !. 2013 2013 2013. 20 21 25 81!. ! ! !.

(104) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 270. !. !. 2011. 02. 01. http://www.appledaily.com.tw/appledaily/article/headline/20110201/33155129/ 104 !. 4. 20. ! 82!.

(105) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 271. !. 2012. 272. !. !. 101. 6. 33. !. — 101. 2. v. 2012. 6 83!. 49. !. 2.

(106) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 273. ! !. 274. 2010. 6. 70. —. — 101. !. 2 84!. ! 101 2012. 2 6. 60 !.

(107) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 275. !. —. — 101. !. i Un. 2 85!. v. 101 2012. 2 6. 61 !.

(108) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. 276. —. 277. 576. !. ! 278 !. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. 2 ni C h101 U engchi. —. v. ! ! —. 101 2 2012 6 47 ! ! StPO!244(2)!Das!Gericht!hat!zur!Erforschung!der!Wahrheit!die!Beweisaufnahme!von! Amts!wegen!auf!alle!Tatsachen!und!Beweismittel!zu!erstrecken,!die!für!die!Entscheidung!von! Bedeutung!sind.! 232 2 Er!ist!verpflichtet,!die!Ermittelung!der!Wahrheit!zu!fördern,!und! hat!dafür!zu!sorgen,!daß!Erörterungen!unterbleiben,!die!die!Hauptverhandlung!ohne!Nutzen! für!die!Aufklärung!der!Sache!verzögern!würden.! 6 1!The!criminal!justice!authorities!shall!investigate!ex!officio!all!the! circumstances!relevant!to!the!assessment!of!the!criminal!act!and!the!accused.! 2!They!shall!investigate!the!incriminating!and!exculpating!circumstances!with!equal!care.! 81 1 The!investigating!judge!undertakes!in!accordance!with!the!law! any!investigative!step!he!deems!useful!for!the!discovery!of!the!truth.!He!seeks!out!evidence! of!innocence!as!well!as!guilt.! 280 ! vgl.!Satzger,!internationals!und!Europäsches!Strafrecht,!5!Aufl.,!2011,§11!Rn.!74.! 281 ! 2010 6 25 ! 279. !. 86!.

(109) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 282. i Un. ! vgl.!Kühne,!Strafprozessrecht,!8.!Aufl.,!2010,!§17!Rn.!301.! ! — 101 2 13 2013 1 173 !. 283. !. 87!. v.

(110) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 284. i Un. v. ! See!Damška,!The!Faces!of!Justice!and!State!Authority:!A!Comparative!Approach!to!the! Legal!Process.! 285 ! See!Monroe.!H.!Freedman,!Abbe!Smith,!Understanding!Lawyers’!Ethics.! 286 ! See!Brian!Kennedy,! 2005 7 278 !. !. 88!.

(111) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 287. !. 2012 6 288 ! Karl!Larenz 289 !. 88. v. 101. 2. ! 2004. 5. 209. !. —. 101 101. 2012 !. 6. 90. ! 89!. 2 2.

(112) 政治大. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 290. !. 291. 2. 1. 2"3. engchi. 101.1.17. v. 1581. 2012. !. ! 2012. i Un. 6. 101 2010 5. 32. 553. 2. 2010 2 46 2009 2 348 Schröder/Verrel,!Strafprozessrecht,!5.!Aufl.,!2011,!Rn.! 400;!Roxin/Schünemann,!Strafverfahrensrecht,!26.!Aufl.,!2009,!§1!Rn.!16.! 292 ! Federal!Rule!of!Evidence!§614(Court’s!Calling!or!Examining!a!Witness):!“(a)!Calling.!The! court!may!call!a!witness!on!its!own!or!at!a!party’s!request.!Each!party!is!entitled!to! cross"examine!the!witness.!. !. 90!.

(113) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (b)!Examining.!The!court!may!examine!a!witness!regardless!of!who!calls!the!witness.! (c)!Objections.!A!party!may!object!to!the!court’s!calling!or!examining!a!witness!either!at!that! time!or!at!the!next!opportunity!when!the!jury!is!not!present”! 293 ! — 101 2 101 2 2012 6 104 !. !. 91!.

(114) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 294. !. — 2. 2 !. 101 101. 2012. 6. 102. ! 92!.

(115) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 295. ! !. 296. !. Ch. 2010. engchi. i Un. 6 2013 93!. 9. v. 70 2. ! 175 !.

(116) 治政 101 年度第 2 次刑事庭會議大立 ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 566 號判決. 最高法院 103 年度台上字第. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 最高法院 103 年度台上字第 311 號判決. !. 94!.

(117) 最高法院 103 年度台上字第 3214 號判決、台南高等法院 102 年度上易字第 534 號判決亦採相同見解）. 最高法院. 政治大. 102 年度台上字第 3744 號判決. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 台灣高等法院 103 年度上易字第 438 號判決. 花蓮高等法院 103 年度上易字 41 號判決花蓮高等法院 103 年度上易字 40 號判決台上字第 1593 號判決. !. 95!. 最高法院 102 年度.

(118) 最高法院 102 年度台上字第 2876 號判決. 在未經調查前僅能從形式上觀察，有時甚至難以區辨. 該等事實或訴訟資料之存在對被告有直接且重大之利益者. 最高法院 101 年度台上字第 6449 號判決. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大共犯共謀殺人. 自形式上判斷，係屬不利益被告之事項，應由檢察官負實質舉證責. ‧. 任，. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. 最高法院 98 年度台上字第 3439 號判決對於起訴案件而言，無非期待檢察官利用偵查階段完成必要之證據調查，為嗣後實行公訴建立良好之舉證基礎，. !. 96!.


(120) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 297. !. i Un. v. ! ETtoday! http://www.ettoday.net/news/20120604/52761.htm. 2012. 6. 4 104 4 26 ! 298 ! 101 6 4 http://www.lawtw.com/article.php?template=article_content&area=free_browse&parent_ path=,1,2169,1481,&job_id=185596&article_category_id=2274&article_id=107308 104 4 26 ! !. 98!.

(121) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 299. i Un. v. ! Bock,!Begriff,!Inhalt!und!Zulässigheit!der!Beweislastumkehr!im!materiellen!Strafrecht,! 2001,s.86 — 99 62 ! 300 ! Heine,!Beweislastumkehr!im!Strafverfahren?,!JZ!1995,!s.651.!. !. 99!.

(122) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 301. !. i Un. v. Reverse!Onus 1988 2000 6 29 ! 302 ! Prütting,!Gegenwartsprobleme!der!Beweislast:!eine!Untersuchung!moderner! Beweislasttheorien!und!ihrer!Anwendung!inbesondere!im!Arbeitsrecht,!1983,!s.49ff.!. !. 100!.

(123) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 303. i Un. v. ! Prütting,!Gegenwartsprobleme!der!Beweislast:!eine!Untersuchung!moderner! Beweislasttheorien!und!ihrer!Anwendung!inbesondere!im!Arbeitsrecht,!1983,!s.57ff.! 304 ! See!James!C.!Morton,!The!Presumption!of!Innocence,!1987,!p.13.!. !. 101!.

(124) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 305. i Un. v. ! See!James!C.!Morton,!The!Presumption!of!Innocence,!1987,!p.110.! ! See!Legislation!The!Criminal!Code:!Corruption,!The!Law!Commission!Report!1997,!p.131. Reverse!Onus 1988 2000 6 29 8 !. 306. !. 102!.

(125) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 307. i Un. v. ! See!Glanville!Williams,!The!Proof!of!Guilt,!1963,!p.184;!Andrew!Ashworth,!Principles!of! Criminal!Law!1999,!p.86.! 308 ! See!Simmens!v.!Dalsheim,543!F.!Supp.!729,737!(S.D.N.Y.1982);State!v.!Alexander,245! S.E.2d!633,637!(W.Va.1978);State!v.!Kopa,311!S.E.2d!412,417!n.2!(W.!Va!1983)! 309 ! See!Julien!R.!Hanley,!Wayne!W.!Schmidt,!Ray!K.!Robbins,!Introduction!to!Criminal! Evidence!and!Court!Procedure,!p.62,5th!edition,!2003,!McCutchan.! 310 ! See!Julien!R.!Hanley,!Wayne!W.!Schmidt,!Ray!K.!Robbins,!Introduction!to!Criminal! Evidence!and!Court!Procedure,!p.62,5th!edition,!2003,!McCutchan.!. !. 103!.

(126) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 er. io. sit. y. Nat !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. al. n. 311. i Un. v. ! Manual!of!Model!Criminal!Jury!Instruction,!p.457.! ! CAL"JIC(2014),!no.3400:”!The!People!must!prove!that!the!defendant! committed___________.!The!defendant!contends!(he/she)!did!not!commit!(this/these)! crime[s]!and!that!(he/she)!was!somewhere!else!when!the!crime[s]!(was/were)!committed.! The!People!must!prove!that!the!defendant!was!present!and!committed!the!crime[s]!with! which!(he/she)!is!charged.!The!defendant!does!not!need!to!prove!(he/she)!was!elsewhere!at! the!time!of!the!crime.!If!you!have!a!reasonable$doubt!about!whether!the!defendant!was! present!when!the!crime!was!committed,!you!must!find!(him/her)!not!guilty.”;Model! Instruction!no.9.07:!One!of!the!issues!in!this!case!is!whether!the!defendant!(insert!name)! was!present!at!the!time!and!place!of!the!alleged!crime.!If,!after!considering!all!the!evidence,! you!have!a!reasonable$doubt!whether!the!defendant!was!present,!then!you!must!find![him]! [her]!not!guilty.! see!also!People!v.!Costello!(1943)!21!Cal.2d!760,!763![135!P.2d!164].! 313 ! See!Martin!v.!Ohio,480!U.S.!228!(1987).! 314 ! See!Ohio!Revised!Code!§2901.05!(Burden!of!proof!"!reasonable!doubt!"!self"defense.)! (A)!Every!person!accused!of!an!offense!is!presumed!innocent!until!proven!guilty!beyond!a! reasonable!doubt,!and!the!burden!of!proof!for!all!elements!of!the!offense!is!upon!the! prosecution.!The!burden!of!going!forward!with!the!evidence!of!an!affirmative!defense,!and! the!burden!of!proof,!by!a!preponderance!of!the!evidence,!for!an!affirmative!defense,!is!upon! the!accused.! 312. !. Ch. engchi. 104!.

(127) 316. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 315. ‧. ! See!United!States!v.!Gilliss,!645!F.2d!1269,!1280!(8th!Cir.!1981).! ! See!Miller!v.!Minister!of!Pension,[1947]!2!All!E.R.!372. more!probable!than!not preponderance!evidence ! 317 ! 18!U.S.C.!17![1986]!section!17:!“(a)!Affirmative!Defense.—!It!is!an!affirmative!defense!to! a!prosecution!under!any!Federal!statute!that,!at!the!time!of!the!commission!of!the!acts! constituting!the!offense,!the!defendant,!as!a!result!of!a!severe!mental!disease!or!defect,!was! unable!to!appreciate!the!nature!and!quality!or!the!wrongfulness!of!his!acts.!Mental!disease! or!defect!does!not!otherwise!constitute!a!defense.(b)!Burden!of!Proof.—!The!defendant!has! the!burden!of!proving!the!defense!of!insanity!by!clear!and!convincing!evidence.”! See!also!United!States!v.!Amos,!803!F.2d!419,!420–22!(8th!Cir.1986);!United!States!v.!Frazier,! 458!F.2d!911,!917!(8th!Cir.!1972);!United!States!v.!Lewellyn,!723!F.2d!615!(8th!Cir.!1983).! 318 ! Model!Instruction,!p.85:!“If!all!of!these!elements!have!been!proved!beyond!a!reasonable! doubt,!you!must!find!the!defendant!guilty,!unless!you!also!find!that!the!defendant!was! insane!at!the!time!of!the!crime,[as!defined!in!Instruction!No.!______]! ! in!which!case![he]! [she]!must!be!found!not!guilty!by!reason!of!insanity.!The!defendant!has!the!burden!of! proving,!by!clear!and!convincing!evidence,!that![he]![she]!was!insane!at!the!time!of!the!crime.! The![government]![prosecution]!does!not!have!the!burden!of!proving!that!the!defendant! was!sane.”! 319 Federal!Rules!of!Criminal!Procedure,!Rule!12.2!Notice!of!an!Insanity!Defense;!Mental! Examination! (a)!Notice!of!an!Insanity!Defense.!A!defendant!who!intends!to!assert!a!defense!of!insanity!at! the!time!of!the!alleged!offense!must!so!notify!an!attorney!for!the!government!in!writing! within!the!time!provided!for!filing!a!pretrial!motion,!or!at!any!later!time!the!court!sets,!and! file!a!copy!of!the!notice!with!the!clerk.!A!defendant!who!fails!to!do!so!cannot!rely!on!an! insanity!defense.!The!court!may,!for!good!cause,!allow!the!defendant!to!file!the!notice!late,! grant!additional!trial"preparation!time,!or!make!other!appropriate!orders.! 316. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. !. Ch. engchi. 105!. i Un. v.

(128) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 sit. y. Nat. 323. er. 320. io. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. ! CAL"JIC(2014),!no.3450:”You!have!found!the!defendant!guilty!of!<insert!crime[s]>.! Now!you!must!decide!whether!(he/she)!was!legally!insane!when!(he/she)!committed!the! crime[s].The$defendant$must$prove$that$it$is$more$likely$than$not$that$(he/she)$was$legally$ insane$when$(he/she)$committed$the$crime[s].$ The!defendant!was!legally!insane!if:! 1.!When!(he/she)!committed!the!crime[s],!(he/she)!had!a!mental!disease!or!defect;!AND! 2.!Because!of!that!disease!or!defect,!(he/she)!was!incapable!of!knowing!or!understanding! the!nature!and!quality!of!(his/her)!act!or!was!incapable!of!knowing!or!understanding!that! (his/her)!act!was!morally!or!legally!wrong.! None!of!the!following!qualify!as!a!mental!disease!or!defect!for!purposes!of!an!insanity! defense:!personality!disorder,!adjustment!disorder,!seizure!disorder,!or!an!abnormality!of! personality!or!character!made!apparent!only!by!a!series!of!criminal!or!antisocial!acts.”! 321 ! Federal!Rules!of!Evidence(2014),!Rule!704(b):” Exception. In a criminal case, an expert witness must not state an opinion about whether the defendant did or did not have a mental state or condition that constitutes an element of the crime charged or of a defense. Those matters are for the trier of fact alone.”! 322 ! See!United!States!v.!Bartlett,856!F.2d!1071!(8th!Cir.!1988)! 323 ! Model!Instruction,!p.721,If!the!defendant![committed]![participated!in]!the!crime!of! (describe!offense)!only!because![he]![she]!reasonably!feared!that!immediate,!serious!bodily! harm!would!be!inflicted!upon![him]![her]![another!person],!if![he]![she]!did!not![commit]! [participate!in]!the!crime,!and!if!the!defendant!had!no!reasonable!opportunity!to!avoid!that!. n. al. !. Ch. engchi. 106!. i Un. v.

(129) 324 325. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. harm,!then![he]![she]!was!coerced.! CAL"JIC!(2014),no.3402:!The!defendant!is!not!guilty!of!<insert!crime[s]>!if!(he/she)!acted! under!duress.!The!defendant!acted!under!duress!if,!because!of!threat!or!menace,!(he/she)! believed!that!(his/her/![or]!someone!else’s)!life!would!be!in!immediate!danger!if!(he/she)! refused!a!demand!or!request!to!commit!the!crime[s].!The!demand!or!request!may!have! been!express!or!implied.!The!defendant’s!belief!that!(his/her/![or]!someone!else’s)!life!was! in!immediate!danger!must!have!been!reasonable.!When!deciding!whether!the!defendant’s! belief!was!reasonable,!consider!all!the!circumstances!as!they!were!known!to!and!appeared! to!the!defendant!and!consider!what!a!reasonable!person!in!the!same!position!as!the! defendant!would!have!believed.!A!threat!of!future!harm!is!not!sufficient;!the!danger!to!life! must!have!been!immediate.! 325 ! See!United!States!v.!Michelson,!559!F.2d!567!n.3!(9th!Cir.!1977).!United!States!v.!May,! 727!F.2d!764,!765!(8th!Cir.!1984);!Shannon!v.!United!States,!76!F.2d!490,!493!(10th!Cir.!1935);! United!States!v.!Blankenship,!67!F.3d!673,!677–78!(8thCir.!1995);!United!States!v.!Campbell,! 609!F.2d!922,!924!(8th!Cir.1979);!United!States!v.!Saettele,!585!F.2d!307,!309!(8th!Cir.!1978).! Ninth!Cir.!Crim.!Jury!Instr.!6.4.1!(1997) ! 326 ! See!United!States!v.!Bailey,!444!U.S.!394,!409!(1980)! 327 ! See!Dixon!v.!United!States,!548!U.S.!1!(2006).! 328 ! See!United!States!v.!Saettele,!585!F.2d!at!309!n.2;!United!States!v.!Logan,!49!F.3d!352! (8th!Cir.!1995).! 329 ! See!United!States!v.!Uthe,!686!F.2d!636,!637!(8th!Cir.!1982).! 330 ! See!R.I.!Recreation!Center!v.!Aetna!Casualty!&!Surety!Co.,!177!F.2d!603,!605!(1st!Cir.! 1949).! 331 ! See!LaFave!&!Scott,!Criminal!Law,!374–75,!385–88!(1972).! 332 ! Modern!Instruction,p.722.! 324. !. Ch. engchi. 107!. i Un. v.

(130) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 333. i Un. v. ! See!Julien!R.!Hanley,!Wayne!W.!Schmidt,!Ray!K.!Robbins,!Instruction!to!Criminal!Evidence! and!Court!Procedure,!p.64,5th!edition,!2003,!McCutchan.! 334 139 2009 11 174 ! 335 1958 85 ! 336 139 2009 11 174 ! 337 ! See!Mathews!v.!United!States,!485!U.S.!58,61(1988);!United!States!v.!Felix,!867!F.2d!1068,! 1074!(8th!Cir.!1989);!United!States!v.!Kurtip,!670!F.2d!870,!977(8th)!. !. 108!.

(131) 必定是在被告主張誘陷抗辯，且已對此盡其應盡之舉證責任以後，檢方始須對被告本即有犯罪傾向之事實予以舉證. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 338. i Un. v. ! See!United!States!v.!Pfeffer,!901!F.2d!654,!656!(8th!Cir.!1990);!United!States!v.!Foster,! 815!F.2d!1200,!1201!(8th!Cir.!1987);!United!States!v.!Crump,!934!F.2d!947,956!(8th!Cir.!1991);! United!States!v.!Hinton,!908!F.2d!at!357.! 339 ! See!United!States!v.!Felix,!867!F.2d!1068,!1074!(8th!Cir.!1989);!Mathews!v.!United!States,! 485!U.S.!58,!61!(1988);!United!States!v.!Kutrip,!670!F.2d!870,!877!(8th!Cir.!1982).! 340 ! See!United!States!v.!Norton,!846!F.2d!521!(8th!Cir.!1988);!United!States!v.!Dion,!762!F.2d! 674!(8th!Cir.!1985)!;!United!States!v.!Hinton,!908!F.2d!355,!358!(8th!Cir.!1990).! 341 ! See!Hampton!v.!United!States,!425!U.S.!484,!488!(1976).! 342 ! See!Jacobson!v.!United!States,!503!U.S.!540,!547!n.1!(1992).! 343 ! See!United!States!v.!Leroux,!738!F.2d!943,947(8th!Cir.!1984) United!States!v.!Neal,!990!F.2d!355!(8th!Cir.!1993).! 344 ! See!Gunderson!v.!Schlueter,!904!F.2d!407,410!n.8!(8th!Cir.!1990);!United!States!v.! Musslyn,!865!F.2d!945!(8th!Cir.!1989)! 345 ! See!United!States!v.!Dougherty,!810!F.2d!763,!770!(8th!Cir.!1987);!United!States!v.!Quinn,! 543!F.2d!640!(8th!Cir.!1976)!. !. 109!.

(132) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. 350. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 346. i Un. v. self*defense. 351. ! See!United!States!v.!Nelson,!988!F.2d!798,!809!(8th!Cir.!1993);!United!States!v.!Stein,!973! F.2d!600,!602!(8th!Cir.!1992).! 347 ! See!People!v.!Laietta,!30!N.Y.!2d!68!(1972),!cert.!den.!407!U.S.!923.! 348 ! CAL"JIC!(2014),!no.3408:”Entrapment!is!a!defense.!The!defendant!has!the!burden!of! proving!this!defense!by!a!preponderance$of$the$evidence.!This!is!a!different!standard!from! proof!beyond!a!reasonable!doubt.!To!meet!this!burden,!the!defendant!must!prove!that!it!is! more$likely$than$not!that!(he/she)!was!entrapped.”! 349 ! See!United!States!v.!Loftus,!992!F.2d!at!798;!United!States!v.!Stanton,!937!F2d!608,! 609(8th!Cir.!1992).! 350 ! 164 2009 1 96 ! 351 ! Modern!Instruction,!no.9.04.!. !. 110!. *.

(133) 352. defense*of*necessity 24. 353. 立. *. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 er. io. sit. y. Nat !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. al. n. 352. i Un. v. ! See!United!States!v.!Fay,!668!F.2d!375,!378!(8th!Cir.!1981).! ! CAL"JIC(2014),!no.3403”!The!defendant!is!not!guilty!of!_____________<insert!crime[s]>!if! (he/she)!acted!because!of!legal!necessity.! ! In!order!to!establish!this!defense,!the!defendant! must!prove!that:! 1.!(He/She)!acted!in!an!emergency!to!prevent!a!significant!bodily!harm!or!evil!to! (himself/herself/![or]!someone!else);!2.!(He/She)!had!no!adequate!legal!alternative;!3.!The! defendant’s!acts!did!not!create!a!greater!danger!than!the!one!avoided;!4.!When!the! defendant!acted,!(he/she)!actually!believed!that!the!act!was!necessary!to!prevent!the! threatened!harm!or!evil;!5.!A!reasonable!person!would!also!have!believed!that!the!act!was! necessary!under!the!circumstances;!AND!6.!The!defendant!did!not!substant"! "ially!contribute!to!the!emergency.! The!defendant!has!the!burden!of!proving!this!defense!by!a!preponderance$of$the$evidence.! This!is!a!different!standard!of!proof!than!proof!beyond!a!reasonable!doubt.!To!meet!the! burden!of!proof!by!a!preponderance!of!the!evidence,!the!defendant!must!prove!that!it!is! more!likely!than!not!that!each!of!the!six!listed!items!is!true.”! 354 ! People!v.!Lopez,!271!Cal.!App.!2d!754!(1997).! 355 ! CAL"JIC!(2014),!no.3410”!A!defendant!may!not!be!convicted!of!<insert!crime[s]>unless! the!prosecution!began!within!years!of!the!date!the!crime[s]!((was/were)! committed/(was/were)!discovered/should!have!been!discovered).!The!present!prosecution! began!on!<insert!date>.![A!crime!should!have!been!discovered!when!the!(victim/law! 353. !. Ch. engchi. 111!.

(134) 被告於案發後，或因不願據實陳述實際之行為人，或有其他顧慮，遂將其犯行均. 政治大. 推卸予已故之某人，甚或是任意捏造而實際上不存在之人，以資卸責. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! enforcement!officer)!was!aware!of!facts!that!would!have!alerted!a!reasonably!diligent! (person/law!enforcement!officer)!in!the!same!circumstances!to!the!fact!that!a!crime!may! have!been!committed.]The!People!have!the!burden!of!proving!by!a!preponderance!of!the! evidence!that!prosecution!of!this!case!began!within!the!required!time.!This!is!a!different! standard!of!proof!than!proof!beyond!a!reasonable!doubt.!To!meet!the!burden!of!proof!by!a! preponderance!of!the!evidence,!the!People!must!prove!that!it!is!more!likely!than!not!that! prosecution!of!this!case!began!within!the!required!time.!If!the!People!have!not!met!this! burden,!you!must!find!the!defendant!not!guilty!of!<insert!crime[s]>.[If!the!People!have! proved!that!it!is!more!likely!than!not!that!the!defendant!was!outside!of!California!for!some! period!of!time,!you!must!not!include!that!period![up!to!three!years]!in!determining!whether! the!prosecution!began!on!time.]”!. !. 112!.

(135) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 356. ! 234 ! ! See!Peter!Lewis,!The!Human!Act!1998:shifting!the!burden,!Crim.!L.!R.,!2000,669. —. 357. !. 113!.

(136) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 358. 99. 221. !. !. Reverse!Onus 1988 2000 6 29 ! 359 ! EComHR,!H.!v.!the!United!Kingdom,!Decision!of!04/04/1990,!Appl.!No.!15023/89.! !. 114!.

(137) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 360. !. Robinson!v.!the!United!Kingdom !. 361. ! EComHR,!Lingens!and!leitgens!v.!Austria,!26!DR!171.!. !. 115!. v.

(138) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 362. i Un. ! ECHR,!Salabiaku!v.!France,!1988,!Series!A!no.!141,!§19.!. !. 116!. v.

(139) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 363. ! EComHR,!Senis!v,!France,!1989,!DR!59,p.59.! ! ECHR,!Pham!Hoang!v.!France,!1992,!Series!A!no.243.!. 364. !. 117!. i Un. v.

(140) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 365. i Un. v. ! EComHR,!Tollefsen!v.!Norway,!Judgment!of!01/04/1992,!Appl.!No.!16269/90.! ! EComHR,!Handy!v.!Ireland,!Decision!of!29/06/1994,!Appl.!No.!23456/94.!. 366. !. 118!.

(141) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 367. i Un. v. ! ECHR,!Brown!v.!the!United!Kingdom,!Judgment!of!02/07/2002,!Appl.!No.44223/98.!. !. 119!.

(142) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 368. i Un. v. ! See!Andrew!Ashworth,!Human!Right:!confiscation!orders!–!burden!on!defendant!to! prove!that!realizable!property!less!than!benefit,!Criminal!Law!Review,!2009,!202.!. !. 120!.

(143) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 369. i Un. v. ! EComHR,!Bates!v.!the!United!Kingdom,!Decision!of!16/01/1996,!Appl.!No.!26280/95.! EComHR,!Foster!v.!the!United!Kingdom,!Decision!of!16/01/1996,!Appl.!No.! 28846/95;!EComHR,!Brock!v.!the!United!Kingdom,!Decision!of!16/01/1996,!Appl.!No.! 29102/95.!. !. 121!.

(144) 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i Un. v. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 370. ! EComHR,!A.G.!v.!Malta,!Judgment!of!10/12/1991,!Appl.!No.!16641/90.! ! EComHR,!Tollefsen!v.!Norway,!Judgment!of!01/04/1992,!Appl.!No.!16269/90.( 372 ! ECHR,!Pham!Hoang!v.!France,!1992,!Series!A!no.243.( )! 373 ! ECHR,!Radio!France!and!Others!v.!France,!RJD!2004" .! 374 ! ECHR,Hamill!v.!the!United!Kindom,!2/12/1997,Appl.!No.!21656/93.! 371. !. 122!. )!.