查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 行車記錄器影音記錄作為刑事訴訟程序證據之研究--以私人違法取證為討論核心=A Study of Dash Cam Video Recordings as Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Focusing on Private Illegal Evidence Collection |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 許戎沂; | 書刊名 | 法律扶助與社會 |
| 卷 期 | 15 2025.09[民114.09] |
| 頁 次 | 頁37-73 |
| 分類號 | 586.6 |
| 關鍵詞 | 基本權干預; 證據能力; 私人不法取證; 資訊隱私權; 法律保留; Interference with fundamental rights; Admissibility of evidence; Illegal private evidence collection; Information privacy rights; Principle of legality; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| DOI | 10.7003/LASR.202509_(15).0002 |
| 中文摘要 | 行車記錄器廣泛應用於交通事故之釐清,但其影音資料能否作 為刑事訴訟中的證據仍具爭議。行車記錄器資料可能侵害德國基本 法所保障的一般人格權,因此可否依聯邦個資法第4條作為授權基礎 存在不同見解。本文在否定說之基礎上,進一步探討私人違反取證 究否適用刑事訴訟法有關證據禁止之規定。在我國,行車記錄器資 料可能侵害憲法第22條保障之資訊隱私權,惟無法以個資法提供授 權依據而屬私人不法取證。又私人不法取證有無證據能力,本文認 為,考量刑事訴訟之目的乃發現真實、法治程序與法和平性,應視 若使用該私人不法取得之證據對於刑事訴訟法治程序減損是否可以 透過追訴利益加以正當化來判斷有無證據能力。最後,相較於德國 法已意識到行車記錄器影音資料在證據使用上的諸多問題,我國對 此並未有深入的討論,希冀可藉此論文促使對此問題的重視。 |
| 英文摘要 | Dashboard cameras are widely used to clarify traffic accidents, however, the admissibility of their audio-visual data as evidence in criminal proceedings remains controversial. In Germany, dashboard camera data may infringe upon the general right of personality protected by the Basic Law, leading to differing interpretations on whether Federal Data Protection Act Article 4 can serve as a legal basis for authorization. Based on the negative view, this paper further explores whether regulations concerning the exclusion of evidence in criminal procedure law apply to private illegal evidence collection. In our country (Taiwan), dashboard camera data may violate the right to information privacy protected under Article 22 of the Constitution, and since the authorization cannot be provide by Personal Data Protection Act, it constitutes illegal private evidence collection. Regarding the admissibility of illegally obtained private evidence, this paper argues that, considering the purposes of criminal proceedings - discovering truth, maintaining due process, and legal peace - the admissibility should be determined by whether the damage to criminal procedural due process from using such illegally obtained private evidence can be justified by prosecution interests. Finally, compared to German law, which has recognized various issues concerning the evidentiary use of dashboard camera footage, there has been limited discussion of this topic in Taiwan. This paper aims to promote greater attention to this issue. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。