施用毒品行為腐蝕著人類社會，毒品所生的毒害直接反應在施用者身上，同時社會秩序也因毒品犯罪而動搖。施用毒品者依我國法制，夾雜著罪犯及病患兩種身分，毒品的可怕在其成癮性，一旦施用毒品，幾乎無法逃離毒品的繼續折磨，所以行為人大多多次施用，進而造成犯罪處斷上的爭議；毒癮者通常是社會最底層及最無助的一群，如何幫助他們戒治、遠離毒品，永遠是最重要的課題；此外，是否對施用毒品者除罪化的討論也未曾間斷，由此可見施用毒品行為的處遇問題，具有極大爭議性。
本文試圖從國際上目前對抗毒品犯罪的立法規範，尤其以德國及歐洲毒品政策為中心，從新檢視我國施用毒品罪及相關的刑事政策。在立法上，施用毒品罪構成要件的釐清，戒毒處分（禁戒處分、觀察勒戒及強制戒治）的法律規範設計，以及施用毒品罪是否應除罪化；在司法上，針對多次施用毒品行為應如何論處，自2006年9月1日起廢除連續犯之後，多次施用毒品行為之論處，讓人無所適從，最高法院於2007 年的決議，仍產生不少疑義（為連續犯、接續犯或集合犯？）；執行上，除了刑罰以外，施用毒品者應受保安處分，但我國當前之觀察勒戒、強制戒治架構，相關功能不彰，施用毒品者的再犯率居高不下，實有通盤檢討之必要。
上述問題，至今皆未獲得全面性的解決，本文將從國際公約，尤其以歐盟指令出發，對照德國毒品刑事政策（Betäubungsmittelgesetz, BtMG）之規定，重新檢討毒品政策，提出適合我國當前需求之毒品刑事政策。

The behavior of using drugs corrupts human society. In other words, not only drug users but the social order suffers from the crime and the damage caused by drugs. In accordance with domestic regulations, drug users may be patients as well as criminals. The danger of drugs lies in users’ addiction to the substances. Once they start to take drugs, users seem to have difficulty stopping using it. Moreover, since criminals tend to take drugs multiple times, how to determine the verdict is always a controversial issue. Usually, drug addicts are at the bottom of the society as a group of helpless people. Therefore, how to help them be rid of drugs and stay away from the substances is the vital issue of all time. Besides, discussions concerning the decriminalization of drug users have never been settled, suggesting the dealing with drug using behavior is extremely controversial.
This study is aimed at reviewing the regulations of criminal law related to drug abusing in Taiwan from the perspective of present international regulations regarding counter-drugs and crime, particularly based on the policies of Germany and European countries. In the aspect of lawmaking, this study focuses on the interpretation of elements constituting drug abusing, the regulation design concerning drug rehabilitation (e.g., restriction, rehabilitating observation, and enforcement), and the need of decriminalizing drug using. In the aspect of judiciary, this study is aimed discussing how to determine the verdict of taking drugs multiple times. Since successive offenses were abolished on Sep. 1st 2006, the determination of multiple drug abusing has caused great disagreement. The resolution of the Supreme Court in 2007 did not settle some disputes (e.g., successive offenses, continual offenses, and collaborative offenses). In practice, in addition to criminal punishment, drug abusers shall receive rehabil ita tive measures. However, the present frameworkof rehabilitating observation and restriction enforcement is incomplete and drug abusers tend to commit crimes again. In this case, it is necessary to make an overall review of the practice.
The issues mentioned above have not been settled comprehensively yet. Therefore, this study is aimed at comparing domestic regulations of drug abusing to those of Bet? ubungsmittelgesetz, BtMG so that it may propose proper regulations of criminal policies to meet the present demands of Taiwan.