本文討論近年新增的貪污治罪條例第 6 條之 1，亦即「財產來源不明罪」刑事責任的解釋問題。我國法院尚未適用過本罪處罰貪污被告，本文主要聚焦於學說見解討論上。依主流見解看法，其傾向理解本罪為事後不履行說明義務的犯罪行為。有別於主流見解，筆者主張該罪並非獨立的事
後犯罪，而是原貪污罪的截堵構成要件，其行為時點與貪污罪相同，其功能則是用以補充處罰無法證明「賄賂罪對價關係」，以及「圖利罪回扣約定」時，降低證明程度與刑度的補充型處罰規範。

This article aims to explore the criminal liability of illicit wealth which is recently amended in Anti-Corruption Statute (Article 6-1). Because Taiwan’s criminal justice has not yet punished any defendant pursuant to Article 6-1, the analysis in this article is mainly focused on theoretical discussions which understand it as an independent crime. Rather than adopting the general thesis, the author argues that “illicit wealth” is nothing but a subsidiary provision (in German: Auffangtatbestand) of corruption crimes. The function of “illicit wealth” is aimed to punish the corruption defendants in case the consideration of bribery or the agreement on “transferring financial interests by paying kickback” cannot be proved to the extent of beyond a reasonable doubt.