第1筆 /總和 1 筆
/ 1 筆
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 緩刑與緩起訴附條件之分析與檢討=The Analysis and Review of Probation and Defer-prosecution with Conditionality |
---|---|
作 者 | 柯耀程; | 書刊名 | 軍法專刊 |
卷 期 | 56:4 2010.08[民99.08] |
頁 次 | 頁101-121 |
分類號 | 587.274、587.274 |
關鍵詞 | 附條件緩刑; 附條件緩起訴; 指定支付; 緩刑撤銷; 緩起訴撤銷; Probation with onditionality; Defer-prosecution with conditionality; Designated payment; Revoking of probation; Revoking of defer-prosecution; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 緩刑與緩起訴均設有附條件之規定,且附條件的內容,除指定支付的對象之外,其餘者皆屬相同。但因緩刑屬於刑罰權宣示的效應;而緩起訴乃刑事程序終結案件的特別授權關係,其並未有刑罰權的具體效應發生,亦即案件並未經論罪科刑確定,故非屬於刑罰權的作用。由於緩刑與緩起訴的法律屬性不同,其附條件的性質與法律效應,亦應對於附條件所依附的基礎處分,而有所差異。惟其差異性何在?究竟緩刑及緩起訴附條件的法律性質為何?其是否具有必然的強制性關係?當附條件的義務未被履行時,所生的法律效應為何?特別是當有附條件的緩刑或緩起訴被撤銷時,對於已經履行的附條件,是否得以主張返還或賠償?均屬必須加以釐清的問題。 |
英文摘要 | There are regulations with conditionality in both probation and defer-prosecution. The contents of such regulations are almost the same, excluding the designated subject of payment. Probation has the effects of declaring the penalty, while defer-prosecution doesn't have concrete effects of the penalty due to the specific authorizing relationships for closing the legal case in criminal procedure. The legal attributes of probation and defer-prosecution are different, which make the nature and legal effects of conditionality in probation and defer-prosecution differ by the attached fundamental disciplinary action. This essay tries to figure out the differences and related issues between probation and defer-prosecution. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。