Research of Deferred Prosecution Disputed with Administrative Penalty Act Article 26

• Main Authors: LEE,YUN-CHIH, 李昀芷
• Other Authors: HSIEH,CHIH-HUNG
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2018
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/bc8afr

碩士 === 輔仁大學 === 法律學系 === 106 === Under the awareness of modern human rights protection, not only the human rights of the public need to be protected, but also the people who are punished by the state. Can the actor expected to no longer be punished for the same act when the actor has been sanctioned by the state? This is the meaning of the principle of double jeopardy in modern countries. Is there a principle of double jeopardy in Republic of China? Is Article 26, section 1 of the Administrative Penalty Act reflect the principle of double jeopardy? Is the principle of double jeopardy in Republic of China a legal principle or a constitutional principle? If other laws violate the principle of double jeopardy, is it unconstitutional? This study is to explore whether the actor are sanctioned by Administrative Penalty Act after being charged by the deferred prosecution with conditionality? It involves whether deferred prosecution with conditionality is a penalty or not? Is it be applicable for a principle of double jeopardy? Then after released of the J.Y. Interpretation No. 751, practice seems to have become a law. It is considered that deferred prosecution with conditionality is non-penalty, only for special treatment measures. Applying Article 26, section 2 of the Administrative Penalty Act, we can impose additional Administrative Penalty Act. But is this really in line with the theory and the people's legal feelings? Can we completely solve the related problems after adding the third section of Article 26 of the Administrative Penalty Act? This study is intended to solve the problem of whether deferred prosecution with conditionality can impose additional Administrative Penalty Act which has been debated for a long time on practice and theory. We will explore how to distinguish criminal illegalities and from administrative illegalities, a study of the principle of double jeopardy, the nature of deferred prosecution with conditionality. And we will also discuss whether the prosecutor’s powers in the deferred prosecution are too expanded, whether there should be a change in the system of deferred prosecution and whether Article 26, section 2 of the Administrative Penalty Act is unconstitutional, etc. Finally, I put forward the amendments suggestion and hope to create a solution to this problem. Implementing double jeopardy, promoting the complete development of the law. At the same time, it also takes into account the stability of the social order of the law and the legal feelings of the people.