李師科（1927－1982）是台灣犯罪史上極具爭議的人物，他之所以被廣泛記憶，並不僅因為其犯下台灣史上第一起「持槍搶劫銀行案」，更在於這起案件所揭示的社會矛盾、司法困境與民間情緒。李師科出身軍人背景，退伍後以開計程車維生，生活並不寬裕，然而他的性格孤僻、內心積鬱，對當時社會分配不公、老兵待遇低落的現象深感不滿。這樣的情緒在當時台灣社會並不罕見，但李師科卻將不滿轉化為極端行動，並以「為友人籌資、為自己準備養老費」為動機，開始策劃搶劫。

在案發前的1980年1月，李師科先以暴力奪取武器。他在台北市教大附小附近持自製手槍射殺警員李勝源，搶走其配發的點三八左輪手槍。這一行動不僅顯示他已具備預謀和決心，也讓他在後續犯案時具備「武力威脅」的能力。兩年後的1982年4月14日，李師科戴著口罩、穿著鴨舌帽，持槍闖入台灣土地銀行古亭分行，並高喊「錢是國家的，命是你們自己的」，隨即以暴力手段搶走新台幣531萬餘元後逃逸。這句話後來也成為案件最具代表性的語句之一，象徵著他對國家與社會的不滿，並強化事件的戲劇性與社會衝擊。

然而，這起銀行搶案的震撼效應並不只在於搶案本身，更在於其後續引發的冤案與司法問題。案件發生後，警方面臨巨大的破案壓力，社會也期待快速逮捕嫌疑人。在此壓力下，一名計程車司機王迎先因長相與警方公布的嫌犯素描相似，並遭鄰居舉報而被捕。王迎先在偵訊過程中遭受嚴刑逼供，並在極度恐懼與絕望中，試圖以「帶領警方尋找贓款」來證明清白。然而在前往秀朗大橋的途中，他竟從橋上跳入新店溪自殺身亡，留下未解的冤屈與悲劇。王迎先的死亡不僅揭露了當時偵查手段的粗暴，也引發社會對司法公正的質疑，成為後來司法改革的重要催化因素。

在王迎先自殺後不久，警方終於因線索追查而抓獲真正的嫌犯李師科。據報導，李師科是因友人檢舉而被捕，且在被捕後表現冷靜，對於自己的犯行坦承不諱。1982年5月21日，法院判處李師科死刑，並在同年6月10日執行槍決。這一結局雖然讓社會感到「正義被快速執行」，但同時也讓案件的爭議更為複雜：有人認為他是應得的罪責者，另有人則視其為在制度壓迫下走向極端的悲劇人物。

這起案件對台灣司法制度的影響深遠，最明顯的是促成《刑事訴訟法》第27條的修訂。此條款後來被稱為「王迎先條款」，規定被告在偵訊時可聘請律師，避免類似冤案與刑求再次發生。這項改革在當時的社會氛圍中，具有重要的象徵意義：它不僅是對王迎先冤死的回應，也代表司法制度逐步朝向更重視人權保障與程序正義的方向轉型。

此外，李師科在社會中的形象也具有強烈的矛盾性。對部分底層民眾而言，他的行為被視為對不公平體制的反抗，甚至被比喻為「現代版的俠盜」或「悲劇英雄」，與台灣民間傳統故事中「為弱者伸張正義」的形象相呼應。因此，李師科的故事多次被改編為電影與文藝作品，其中《老科的最後一個秋天》即為代表作之一。這些改編不僅再現事件經過，也透過戲劇化的方式探討社會結構與人性衝突。

在新北市新店區，曾有民眾為李師科設立「李師科廟」，這一現象更凸顯其成為某種文化象徵的程度。廟宇的存在並非意味著對暴力行為的肯定，而是反映出部分民眾對社會制度、對不公正待遇的長期不滿，並將李師科視為「抗爭的符號」。因此，李師科的故事不只是一起犯罪事件，更是一段折射台灣社會轉型期矛盾與情緒的歷史。

Li Shike (1927–1982) was one of the most controversial figures in Taiwan’s criminal history, known for committing Taiwan’s first “armed bank robbery” case.

Li Shike’s notoriety stems not only from the crime itself but also from the social contradictions, judicial issues, and public sentiments it exposed. He was a former soldier who, after discharge, worked as a taxi driver. Life was not easy for him, and his character was described as solitary and withdrawn. He felt deep dissatisfaction with the social inequities of the time and the poor treatment of veterans. In a society where such grievances were not uncommon, Li Shike chose to turn his resentment into extreme action, planning the robbery in order to raise funds for friends and to secure his own retirement.

Before the bank robbery, Li Shike first obtained a weapon through violence. In January 1980, near the Taipei Municipal Teachers College Elementary School, he shot and killed police officer Li Shengyuan with a homemade gun and stole the officer’s issued .38 revolver. This act showed not only his premeditation and determination but also ensured he had the means to threaten others in his later crime. Two years later, on April 14, 1982, wearing a mask and a baseball cap, Li Shike entered the Guting branch of the Land Bank of Taiwan. He shouted, “The money belongs to the state; your lives are your own,” and then violently stole over NT$5.31 million before fleeing. This sentence became one of the most memorable quotes from the case, symbolizing his resentment toward the state and adding to the event’s dramatic and social impact.

However, the shock of the bank robbery did not end with the theft itself. What followed was a wrongful arrest and serious judicial problems. Under intense pressure to solve the case, the police arrested taxi driver Wang Yingxian because his appearance resembled the police sketch and he was reported by neighbors. During interrogation, Wang was subjected to severe coercion. In extreme fear and despair, he attempted to prove his innocence by leading police to search for the stolen money. During this process, he jumped from the Xiulang Bridge into the Xindian River and died by suicide. Wang’s death revealed the brutality of investigative methods at the time and sparked public doubt about judicial fairness. It became an important catalyst for later judicial reforms.

Shortly after Wang’s death, the police finally captured the real suspect, Li Shike, following a tip from an acquaintance. He remained calm after being arrested and confessed to the crime. On May 21, 1982, the court sentenced Li Shike to death, and he was executed by firing squad on June 10 of the same year. While this outcome was seen by some as “swift justice,” it also deepened the case’s controversy. Some viewed him as fully responsible for his crimes, while others saw him as a tragic figure driven to extremes by systemic oppression.

The case had a lasting impact on Taiwan’s judicial system, most notably prompting revision of Article 27 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This amendment, later known as the “Wang Yingxian Clause,” allowed defendants to hire lawyers during interrogation to prevent wrongful convictions and coercion. This reform was not only a response to Wang’s wrongful death but also represented a shift toward stronger protection of human rights and procedural justice.

Li Shike’s social image remains highly contradictory. To some lower-income members of society, he was seen as a rebel against an unfair system, even likened to a “modern-day Robin Hood” or tragic hero. His story has been adapted into films and literary works multiple times, with “The Last Autumn of Old Ke” being one of the most representative adaptations. These retellings not only reenact the events but also use dramatic narrative to explore social structures and human conflict.

In New Taipei City’s Xindian District, some residents even built a “Li Shike Temple,” highlighting the extent to which he became a cultural symbol. The existence of such a shrine does not necessarily imply approval of violence; rather, it reflects long-standing public dissatisfaction with the system and a projection of that discontent onto Li Shike as a symbol of resistance. Therefore, Li Shike’s story is more than a crime case—it is a historical reflection of the contradictions and emotions during Taiwan’s transitional period.