新型受贿的裁判尺度与社会指引——指导案例号《潘玉梅、陈宁受贿案》评析

发布时间：2019-05-10 09:10

【摘要】：案例指导制度的建构是一个长期、渐进的演化过程。对已公布的指导性案例进行实证考察并对今后的发展方向提出建议,是推进案例指导制度建设的"另一条有效途径"。指导性案例作为典型法律事例,是事实与规范相互匹配的样板案件。指导案例3号提供了新型受贿的一般裁判尺度,相关裁判要点是对刑法条文的适法性解释,与特定的事实情形相匹配。在理解和参照指导性案例的过程中,应聚焦于"类似案件"的事实识别。同时,在成文法语境下,刑事指导案例作为公法性案例具有不同于私法性案例的形成和运行机制,其原创性和能动性是有限度的,不宜过度期待和追求。不过,这也并不影响其"指导性"功能,包括统一裁判尺度、实现"同案同判",承载"社会指引"等多重价值目标的实现。此外,定罪案例和量刑案例应当并重,今后应加大量刑案例的培育和研发力度,同时在编写技术上加强对"案情事实"的叙述和公布。
[Abstract]:The construction of case guidance system is a long and gradual evolution process. It is another effective way to promote the construction of the case guidance system through empirical investigation of the published guiding cases and suggestions on the development direction of the case guidance system in the future. As a typical legal case, guiding case is a model case in which the facts and norms match each other. The guiding case No. 3 provides a new general criterion of taking bribes. The main points of the judgment are the applicable interpretation of the provisions of criminal law, which matches the specific facts. In the process of understanding and referring to guiding cases, we should focus on the fact identification of "similar cases". At the same time, in the context of statutory law, the criminal guidance case as a public law case has different formation and operation mechanism from the private law case, its originality and initiative are limited, and should not be overexpected and pursued. However, this does not affect its "guidance" function, including the unification of adjudication criteria, the realization of "co-adjudication", carrying "social guidance" and other multi-value goals. In addition, both conviction cases and sentencing cases should be paid equal attention, and the cultivation and research and development of sentencing cases should be strengthened in the future, and the narration and publication of "facts of the case" should be strengthened in compiling technology.
【作者单位】：浙江省高级人民法院刑二庭;
【分类号】：D924.392;D920.5

【参考文献】