在醫療刑法上，刑法第十條第四項關於重傷定義的適用與涵攝，如何精確區辨「傷害」與「重傷」？常造成分歧而有實務上的重要性。然而即便目前刑法經修正後，是否因新法加上「嚴重減損」之後，即能弭平上述相關爭議，抑或衍生更大的不確定性？而參照過去最高法院所曾做出有關重傷之判例統計，此六款中則以針對第四款「肢體重傷」的司法解釋最多，足見在人體器官或主要機能的傷害中，肢體傷害在司法實務中，確實變異最多情況也最複雜。在罪刑法定的原則下，對於罪刑相關之定義應儘可能類型化及明確化，以維持刑罰之穩定性與預見可能性，且對於重傷害之要件明確化，確實有賴醫界與法界相互溝通與科技整合。本文即初步彙整「肢體機能」與「重傷害」之相關司法實務判決並加以分析，另佐以目前醫療技術之現況與分類，對於目前實務判決趨勢加以對照及檢視，最後並提出歸納與類型化工具之建議。

In medical-related criminal litigations, the reflection of Article 10, Section 4 of the R.O.C. Criminal Code tends to induce disagreements on the interpretations thereof and hence possesses certain degree of importance in practice. Even after the amendment of the Criminal Code adding the legal term, “severe impairment of body functions”, it is
still unclear whether such revision can resolve the abovementioned related disputes or even result in greater uncertainty. Referring to past Supreme Court decisions on mayhem,most of those decisions contain legal constructions of the term, “mayhem” as set forth in said Paragraph 4 of Article 10 of the Criminal Code. That alone is sufficient to show that, among the various injuries to human organs or the major functions thereof, limb injuries are, in legal practice, the most complicated and with the most variations. The disagreement or uncertainty not only fails to recede but rather has experienced increase in degrees. In order to properly criminalize certain conducts and to maintain the stability
and predictability of criminal penalties, it is necessary to endeavor to more clearly define the conducts which are to be criminalized. Moreover, the clarification of the components of mayhem needs to rely on the integration of the medical and the legal disciplines. This article analyzes judicial decisions about severe limb injury or mayhem, makes reference to the current status of medical techniques, undertakes comparisons and examination, and offers recommendations on practical tools for classification and application.