行政罰與刑事罰之基本原理原則，雖已漸趨一致性，但二者核心領域之區別標準則相當明確，應無流動變化之可能；一違法行為究為刑事不法，抑或行政不法，應僅存於行政不法與刑事不法之交錯地帶，始取決於立法者之主觀，就事件之特性、侵害法益之輕重程度、欲達到管制效果，衡酌為行政法上義務之行為，應科以行政法罰或刑事罰，此為立法裁量之權限。如有刑事罰與行政罰競合時，基於刑事罰之懲罰性較強、程序進行及證據認定較為嚴謹，應優先適用刑事罰，並禁止國家再對同一違法行為進行訴追、處罰，惟若因處罰之種類、性質截然不同，基於不同之法規範目的、維護公共秩序之作用等行政目的，對於罰鍰以外之沒入或其他種類行政處罰，仍得併予裁處。然面對法人犯罪之眾多爭議，罰金刑對抗法人犯罪係最經濟、有效、無副作用的刑事罰，不僅能收刑罰威嚇作用，且罰金刑可依犯罪型態多樣化靈活適用，而對於圖謀暴利之法人犯罪，更可確保剝奪犯罪不法所得。食品安全犯罪行為造成危害影響之深、層面之廣，已足以將其入罪化；入罪化之效果，不僅可透過罰金刑之刑事罰，發揮較行政罰強之嚇阻作用，更可因課以巨額罰金刑，令不法行為受到經濟上之制裁，降低犯罪之動機，進而達到預防之效果。

Although the basic principles of the Administrative Punishment and Criminal Punishment have become more consistent with each other, the difference of the standard between the two core area is quite clear which should have been settled at lost. An offense should define as the Criminal or the Administrative violation only exist in the ecotone which depending on the legislator's lntent. Depending on the Subjective of legislators by the featured event, the severity of violations of protected legal interests, and the desire to achieve the control effect to measure the behavior of administrative law obligations should impose Administrative or Criminal Punishment. This is the criteria of legislative discretion. When the Concurrence of Criminal and Administrative Punishment, Criminal Punishment shall enjoy priority because of the stronger punitive effect, procedures and evidentiary rules are more stringent. The Government will be prohibited for the same offense prosecuted again. However, as a result of the type of punishment and different nature, the government still can combine sanctions such as other types of administrative punishment's because they are different from the purpose of law provisions and the maintenance of public order other than imposition of fines. Punishment of fines is the most economical, effective and no negative effects of Criminal punishment against Corporate Crime. It not only can achieve threatened punishment action and flexible application in diversified crime patterns, but also can ensure that the proceeds of crime and profits of Corporate Crime will be deprived. Food safety have profound impact and wide spectrum as a crime. The effect as a crime is not only because criminal punishment have a stronger deterrent effect than administrative punishment, but also because the huge criminal fine serves as a valid economic sanctions. Therefore, it can reduce the incentive of crime and achieve the better effect of crime prevention.