動物保護法之犯罪規範及其實證研究

CCUR > College of Law > Department of Law & Graduate Institute of Law > thesis > Item 987654321/52696

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/52696

Title:	動物保護法之犯罪規範及其實證研究 The Criminal Norm of Animal Protection Law and Its Empirical Research
Authors:	謝濬緯
Contributors:	法律學系
Keywords:	動物保護動物福利動物權利虐待動物動物地位
Date:	2023
Issue Date:	2023-07-06 11:24:36 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	動物與人類之關係密切，在科技文明發展後，動物之於人類不再只是單純之利用關係，動物保護之觀念亦隨之萌芽發展，參閱文獻資料，從人類宗教信仰及生活文化裡，皆能觀察到動物保護於人類社會呈現之樣貌，在動物保護觀念之發展脈絡中，「動物福利觀」及「動物權利觀」是最主要之哲學觀，在往後動物保護法制化之過程中也產生一定之影響力。動物保護法立法之初，並未設有刑罰之相關規定，在面對侵害動物之行為人時，僅能透過行政罰方式制裁行為人，2006年發生駭人之「內湖虐貓案」後，社會開始對於行政罰是否足以處理虐待動物一事，出現檢討之聲浪，立法者旋即於隔年將刑罰手段納入動物保護之法規範中，正式確立侵害動物行為之入罪化，大幅提升法律對於動物之保護程度，惟動物保護法增訂犯罪規範後，亦產生許多爭議，諸如保護法益之不明確、構成要件之紊亂以及執行成效不彰皆是備受討論之部分。對於保護法益之理解，本文認為在動物法規範逐漸擺脫以人類為中心之立法思維後，似以「動物本身之權利」作為保護法益是屬較為合理之解釋；現行動物保護法中之犯罪規範，有第25條、第25條之1、第27條之1、第30條2項及第31條2項。本文中亦有針對該等條文，提出往後修法之建議方向，以解決構成要件紊亂、法規範不周全之爭議。另外，本文將從動物保護犯罪規範之現象面以及法律面切入，與六名有動物保護相關經驗之實務工作者訪談，釐清實務工作者對於該等議題之看法與動物保護之困境。最後於文末，再將文獻資料以及訪談內容所得到之回饋，整理分析給予動物保護法制適當之建議。 There is a close relationship between animals and humans. After the development of scientific and technological civilization, animals and humans are no longer just a relationship of use, and the concept of animal protection has also sprung up. Reference materials, from human religious beliefs and life culture, can all be Observing the appearance of animal protection in human society, in the development of animal protection concepts, "animal welfare concept" and "animal rights concept" are the most important philosophical concepts, and they will also be in the process of legalization of animal protection in the future. have a certain influence. At the beginning of the legislation of the Animal Protection Law, there were no relevant provisions on punishment. When facing the perpetrator of animal violations, the perpetrator could only be punished by means of administrative punishment. The society began to criticize whether administrative punishment was sufficient to deal with animal cruelty. Legislators immediately incorporated the punishment method into the animal protection laws and regulations the following year, formally establishing the criminalization of animal violations, and greatly improving the legal treatment of animals. The degree of protection, but after the animal protection law was added to the criminal norms, there were also many controversies, such as the ambiguity of the legal interests of protection, the disorder of the constituent elements, and the ineffective implementation. Regarding the understanding of the protection of legal interests, this article believes that after the animal law norms gradually get rid of the human-centered legislative thinking, it seems to be a more reasonable interpretation to use "the rights of animals themselves" as the protection of legal interests; Articles 25 and 25 of the Animal Protection Law Article 1, Article 27-1, Article 30 Item 2 and Article 31 Item 2 are the criminal norms of the Animal Protection Law. This article also proposes the direction of future amendments to these articles in order to solve the problem. Disputes about disordered requirements and incomplete legal norms. Finally, this article will start from the phenomenon and legal aspects of animal protection, interview six practitioners with experience in animal protection, clarify the practitioners' views on these issues and the dilemma of animal protection, and summarize the content of the interviews. After sorting, give appropriate advice on animal protection legislation.
Appears in Collections:	[Department of Law & Graduate Institute of Law ] thesis

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	181	View/Open

View Licence

Loading...