我國採用日本的兩極化刑事政策，進而發展寬嚴並進的刑事政策已行之有年，但近年逐漸朝向「社區化」刑事政策邁進，並主張修復制度不宜稱為修復式「司法」的修復式正義工作模式，且修復式正義在刑事政策的定位、框定範圍及客觀認知仍偏屬狹隘，強調修復過程大於結果的程序正義已逐漸朝向社區化刑事政策之實踐；職是，本研究以社區化刑事政策最具代表性的「修復式正義」（RJ）為主軸，針對臺灣本島20歲以上之一般成年者以4呎問卷調查，區分人口特徵、對修復式正義的觀感、社區參與的期望及修復式正義造成刑事政策之影響等四區塊進行交叉量化分析，研究發現人口結構對應修復正義的觀感、社區參與的期望及修復式正義在刑事政策特徵上的改變，會因個人背景之不同，對於依變項之關聯性有不同的反應，但客觀上對於修復式正義之觀感及社區參與程度之期望可同時預測對於修復式正義在刑事政策特徵上之影響及改變，則具有顯著關聯性，突顯社區對於修復式正義之建構有其重要性及必要性，也強調社區對於刑事政策之價值；同時本文也具體建議修復制度應重新調校其定位，發揮中間性制裁之實質效能，政府宜持續重視並投入社區化資源及提升減輕司法負荷之價值性，以實現刑事政策永續發展的藍圖。

Taiwan has adopted Japan's polarized criminal policy and developed a tough and soft criminal policy for many years, but in recent years it has gradually moved towards a "community-oriented" criminal policy. The new claim holds that the restorative system should not be called a restorative model of Restorative "Justice", and Restorative Justice is narrow in its positioning, scope, and objective cognition in criminal policy. The procedural justice, which emphasizes the restorative process rather than the result, has gradually moved towards the practice of community-based criminal policies. Therefore, this study focuses on "Restorative Justice" (RJ), the most representative form of community-based criminal policy. A 4-foot questionnaire survey was conducted for adults over the age of 20 on the main island of Taiwan. The content of the questionnaire distinguishes demographic characteristics, perceptions of Restorative Justice, expectations of community participation, and the impact of Restorative Justice on criminal policies. A total of four blocks are used for cross-quantitative analysis. The study found that demographic structure corresponds to perceptions of Restorative Justice, expectations of community participation, and changes in criminal policy characteristics of Restorative Justice, which will respond differently to the correlation of dependent variables due to different personal backgrounds. However, the objective perception of restorative justice and the expectation of community participation can simultaneously predict the influence and change of Restorative Justice in criminal policy characteristics, and there is a significant correlation. The results highlight the importance and necessity of the community for Restorative Justice, as well as the value of the community for criminal policy. At the same time, this paper also specifically suggests that the restorative system should re-adjust its positioning and give full play to the substantive effectiveness of intermediate sanctions. The government should also continue to pay attention to and invest in community-based resources and enhance the value of reducing judicial load.