於2019年2月22日公布之釋字第775號解釋文第1段部分諭知：刑法第47條第1項規定，有關累犯加重本刑部分，不生違反憲法一行為不二罰原則之問題。惟其不分情節，基於累犯者有其特別惡性及對刑罰反應力薄弱等立法理由，一律加重最低本刑，於不符合刑法第59條所定要件之情形下，致生行為人所受之刑罰超過其所應負擔罪責之個案，其人身自由因此遭受過苛之侵害部分，對人民受憲法第8條保障之人身自由所為限制，不符憲法罪刑相當原則，牴觸憲法第23條比例原則。「於此範圍內，有關機關應自本解釋公布之日起2年內，依本解釋意旨修正之。於修正前，為避免發生上述罪刑不相當之情形，法院就該個案應依本解釋意旨，裁量是否加重最低本刑。」然上開2年修法期限早於2021年2月21日屆至，立法院迄今仍未能依此號解釋意旨完成修法，而法院對如何依此號解釋意旨裁量是否加重最低本刑，內部亦存在嚴重分歧，致最高法院刑事大法庭於2022年4月27日作成110年度台上大字第5660號裁定，藉導入檢察官舉證責任之程序法要件，試圖移轉法院於個案裁量時所面臨之實體上爭議，並因而引發院檢互槓的「累犯之亂」，本文即嘗試從違憲宣告模式及權力分立原則，談此號解釋諭知刑法累犯之規定應予修正等部分為何難以被執行。

Interpretation No.775 Judicial Yuan (Issued Feb.22 2019) has declared that Article 47 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of China would be unconstitutional under some situations and has requested that the Legislative Yuan amend the law within two years. However, the 2-year time limit has been exceeded, the Legislative Yuan has not yet amended the unconstitutional law. To resolve the problem of diversity and turmoil in judicial applications concerning whether and how to increase the penalty for recidivism in criminal courts, the Criminal Great Chamber of Supreme Court then issued the case of No.5660 in April 2022. This article will try to revisit the Interpretation No.775 Judicial Yuan from the view of Constitutional Review Models and Doctrine of Separation of Powers. Then try to figure out why the Interpretation No.775 cannot be implemented. To sum up, to preserve the credibility of Judicial Yuan's Interpretation No. 775, the Legislative Yuan should amend Article 47 of the Criminal Code as soon as possible.