:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:從連坐處罰觀念探討酒醉駕車行政處罰的界限
書刊名:臺北大學法學論叢
作者:湯儒彥曹壽民
作者(外文):Tang, Ru-yenTsao, Shou-min
出版日期:2007
卷期:62
頁次:頁91-93+95-124
主題關鍵詞:酒醉駕車交通違規交通處罰連坐處罰交通安全Drunk-drivingTraffic violationPenalty to traffic violatorCollateral penaltyTraffic safety
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(5) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:1530
  • 點閱點閱:219
近年來,為解決酒後駕車的道路安全問題,政府不斷加重酒醉駕車之處罰內容與處罰型態,並構思擴大處罰之對象與範圈,以遏止酒後駕車之行為,其中最大的爭議,即在於「連坐處罰」觀念的提出,及其所導致酒駕處罰對象向外的大幅延伸。酒後駕車處罰的對象是否全無界限?抑或單憑立法者單面的價值判斷,即可加以立法處罰?而合理處罰界限範圍的判斷基準又應如何建立?諸此問題,均嚴重影響人民之權利義務保障,在實務領域,確實亟待釐清。因此,本文擬針對酒醉駕車連坐處罰對象的界限範團進行深入探討。 研究中,首先將說明行政處罰的本質與目的及構成處罰的可歸責性,繼而針對連坐處罰之定義與型態,及各種連坐責任發生的基礎,做學理上探討,據以建構酒醉駕車處罰對象之界限範圍。研究結果發現,連坐並非法律名詞,既欠缺明確的定義,更鮮見學理上的討論,而社會上習用的連坐,實係建構在連坐人與酒駕者的身分、行為與時空三種社會關係的連結上,但單純的社會關係並不足以構成責任的發生,仍必須建構在社會與倫理價值上的可非難理由,包括對酒駕行為發生具有積極促成的意圖或對酒駕危險源的風險控制監督義務。研究最後亦對社會上所關心之酒駕乘客、家人、酒品所有人、販酒人或供酒人及共同飲酒人等之「入罪化」問題加以探討,冀以提供未來酒後駕車行政處罰立法政策與執法之依據。
In recent years, in order to solve the road safety problem derived from driving after drinking in Taiwan, the government is increasing the content and types of penalties for drunk-driving and conceiving to expand the penal limit to curb its occurrence. Among the will-be added penalties, collateral penalty is the most controversial one since it may result in punishing the innocent people. Is there are any legislative line of demarcation for drunk-driving penalty? Or, it only depends on legislators' judgment? How to draw the rational line of demarcation? For protecting people's right, these questions really need to be answered. In this work, the purpose and essence of administrative penalty are reviewed. Then, for identifying the scope of collateral penalty, it will define the definition of ‘collateral penalty’ and state its cause of responsibility. From the analysis of this study, collateral penalty, a conventional but legislative noun, without definite definition, is based on three kinds of social relationships between the drunk driver and the man who is punished in succession as causality, behavior relation, and space relation. However, penalty is not only for punishing, any collateral penalty must be with reasons of criticism on the society and ethics value. Therefore, the causes of various collateral penalties including passengers, family, alcohol owners…etc. will be explored. Finally, the result of this article will give normative suggestions to legislate against drunk­driving.
期刊論文
1.許玉秀(19980400)。保證人地位的法理基礎--危險前行為是構成保證人地位的唯一理由﹖。刑事法雜誌,42(2),31-78。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.林明鏘(2002)。行政制裁(行政罰):公法學篇。月旦法學教室,3,60-61。  延伸查詢new window
3.陳淑芳(2003)。行政罰之責任條件。月旦法學教室,10,20-21。  延伸查詢new window
4.湯儒彥、陳賓權(2004)。擴大酒駕處罰對象的合理性探討。都市交通,19(3),1-15。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.廖義男(1999)。行政處罰之基本爭議問題。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.李昂杰(2001)。保證人地位,0。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.林錫堯(200609)。行政罰法。臺北:元照出版公司。  延伸查詢new window
2.洪家殷(2000)。行政秩序罰論。臺北市:五南書局。  延伸查詢new window
3.李惠宗(200508)。行政罰法之理論與案例。臺北:李惠宗。  延伸查詢new window
4.吳庚(2003)。行政法之理論與實用。臺北:元照出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.黃榮堅(1999)。刑罰的極限。元照出版有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
6.林山田(1998)。刑法通論。林山田。  延伸查詢new window
7.(1993)。法律政治辭典。法律政治辭典。0。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.蔡中志(2006)。酒精影響安全駕駛及其法規之檢討(三),0。  延伸查詢new window
2.Stoop, Jeffrey A.(2006)。Tensions between Security and Privacy in Implementing Policies Geared toward Monitoring and Prosecuting Terror Suspects,0。  new window
圖書論文
1.謝世憲(19940800)。論公法上之比例原則。行政法之一般法律原則。台北:三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
2.洪家殷(2000)。行政秩序罰上之參與者(共犯)。行政法爭議問題研究。五南。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE