責罰相當原則之研究－以公職人員利益衝突迴避法為例;The principle of Proportionality of Punishment: A Case Study of the Act on Recusal of Public Servants Due to Conflicts of Interest

NCUIR > College of Hakka Studies > Graduate Institute of Law and Government > Electronic Thesis & Dissertation > Item 987654321/99314

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ir.lib.ncu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/99314

Title:	責罰相當原則之研究－以公職人員利益衝突迴避法為例;The principle of Proportionality of Punishment: A Case Study of the Act on Recusal of Public Servants Due to Conflicts of Interest
Authors:	張舜鈞;Chang, Shun-Jyun
Contributors:	法律與政府研究所
Keywords:	責罰相當;比例原則;公職人員利益衝突迴避法;處罰責任主義;Proportionality of Punishment;Act on Recusal of Public Servants Due to Conflicts of Interest
Date:	2026-01-22
Issue Date:	2026-03-06 18:36:30 (UTC+8)
Publisher:	國立中央大學
Abstract:	行政罰作為一種制裁違反行政法義務人民之手段，為避免過度侵害人民的權利，立法者爰將許多重要的法律原則體現於條文中。本文旨在探討行政處罰中的「責罰相當原則」其內涵為何，分別以憲法層次及行政法層次進行研析，並以「公職人員利益衝突迴避法」為例，藉由梳理該法的立法背景與沿革、現行的處罰規定、審酌之因素裁罰的現況及個案分析，探討該法的處罰規定是否符合責罰相當原則的內涵，最後試圖就如何以修法及解釋公職人員利益衝突迴避法的方式去落實責罰相當原則。研究發現責罰相當原則的憲法依據是處罰責任主義和禁止過苛原則，大法官則是以比例原則來詮釋責罰相當原則，行政機關在處罰時所應遵循的責罰相當原則，其內涵是必須先確認行為人具可罰的責任後，再依據責任的高低、行政罰法應審酌因素、個案情形等裁量適當的金額。本文另藉由裁罰案件分析發現「公職人員利益衝突迴避法」部分案件未能落實責罰相當原則，爰提出避免過度調降罰鍰金額等建議，期能兼顧公職人員利益衝突迴避法之立法目的和受處分人的權益保障。 ;As a means of sanctioning individuals who breach obligations under administrative law, administrative penalties serve as an instrument of state coercion. To prevent excessive infringement upon individual rights, the legislature has incorporated numerous fundamental legal principles into statutory provisions. This study seeks to elucidate the substantive meaning of the principle of proportionality between fault and punishment within the context of administrative sanctions. This discussion is conducted at both the constitutional and administrative law levels, using the Act on Recusal of Public Officials due to Conflicts of interest as a case study. By examining the legislative background and historical development of the Act, its current sanctioning provisions, the factors considered in penalty determination, and the practical operation of such sanctions through case analysis, this paper explores whether the Act’s punitive framework conforms to the essence of the principle of proportionality between fault and punishment. Finally, the study endeavors to propose approaches to effectively realize this principle through statutory amendment and interpretative refinement of the Act. The research finds that the constitutional foundations of the principle of proportionality between fault and punishment lie in the doctrine of culpability and the prohibition of excessive punishment. The Constitutional Court has, in turn, interpreted this principle of proportionality. Within the administrative context, the substance of the principle requires that administrative authorities, prior to imposing sanctions, first ascertain the presence of culpability on the part of the responsibility, the factors prescribed in the Administrative Penalty Act, and the specific circumstances of the case. Through the case analysis, this study further identifies instances in which the Act on Recusal of Public Officials due to Conflicts of Interest has failed to fully implement the principle of proportionality between fault and punishment. Accordingly, the paper proposes recommendations aimed at preventing the excessive reduction of fines, thereby seeking to reconcile the legislative objectives of the Act with the protection of the rights of sanctioned individuals.
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Law and Government] Electronic Thesis & Dissertation

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	397	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...