刑事判决书法律适用说理问题研究
发布时间：2018-09-03 18:57
【摘要】：适用法律说理是判决书说理的重要内容,它由定罪适用法律说理和量刑适用法律说理组成,是对运用法律解决定罪和量刑问题的过程解释说明。实践中,多数刑事判决书的适用法律说理都过于简单,导致整个判决书说理不足,可接受性低。而过去十年间,判决书说理问题一直没有改善。从适用法律说理方面进行研究,不仅是研究角度的创新,而且有利于使判决说理问题更加具体化地呈现,有利于提高判决书的说理性。此外,研究判决书适用法律说理问题还可以为当前的司法改革贡献一份力量。本文以闫啸天等三个案件的判决书为依托,对其适用法律说理问题进行分析。通过分析发现,三份判决书在适用法律说理上都存在问题。具体表现为:定罪上主要是缺乏法律规定的展示和解释,对彼罪的分析不足;量刑上表现在对主刑的适用说理不足,对附加刑的适用说理畸轻。引发上述问题的原因有内在和外在之分。内在原因主要是法官自身的原因,主要有两个方面。第一,法官对适用法律说理的受众范围认识不足,对各受众群体的说理需求认识不清。第二,法官在具体适用法律说理时,没有认识到法益分析在适用法律说理上的作用,具体表现在:定罪方面,忽视法益分析在认定罪与否、此罪与彼罪方面的作用,在量刑方面,忽视法益分析在认定量刑区间方面的作用。外在原因主要是从法官所处的适用法律说理环境和制度层面进行分析。在适用法律说理环境方面,法官受当前定罪说理模式,“轻量刑”的传统观念,审判独立性三个方面的影响;在制度层面,我国缺乏法律适用的激励机制,法律文书指导的作用也具有局限性。上述原因共同导致了判决书适用法律说理不足。通过以上分析,笔者结合当前司法改革的大背景,从正面和侧面两个角度对解决判决书适用法律说理问题提出建议。具体而言,正面建议是构建适用法律说理的新模式,主要从厘清定罪、量刑适用法律说理的构成上入手;侧面建议包括以立法提升适用法律说理的约束刚性,建立适用法律说理的考评机制,完善判决答疑机制。
[Abstract]:Application of legal reasoning is an important content of judgment reasoning, which is composed of applicable legal reasoning of conviction and applicable legal reasoning of sentencing, and is an explanation of the process of applying the law to solve the problem of conviction and sentencing. In practice, the applicable legal reasoning of most criminal judgments is too simple, which leads to insufficient reasoning and low acceptability of the whole judgment. Over the past decade, judgment reasoning has not improved. The research from the aspect of applicable legal reasoning is not only the innovation of the research angle, but also helps to make the judgment reasoning appear more concretely and to improve the rationality of judgment. In addition, the study of the legal reasoning of judgment application can also contribute to the current judicial reform. Based on the judgment of Yan Xiaotian and other three cases, this paper analyzes the applicable legal reasoning. Through analysis, it is found that there are problems in the applicable legal reasoning of the three judgments. The specific manifestations are: the conviction is mainly lack of legal provisions of the display and explanation, the analysis of the crime is inadequate; sentencing is reflected in the application of the main punishment of inadequate reasoning, the application of supplementary punishment is abnormally light. The causes of these problems are internal and external. The internal reason is mainly the judge's own reason, mainly has two aspects. First, the judges have insufficient understanding of the audience scope of applicable law reasoning and lack of clear understanding of the reasoning needs of various audience groups. Second, when the judge applies the legal reasoning specifically, he does not realize the function of the legal interest analysis in the application of the law reasoning, which is manifested in the following aspects: conviction, neglecting the role of the legal interest analysis in the determination of the crime, the crime and the other crime. In the aspect of sentencing, the function of legal interest analysis in determining sentencing interval is ignored. The external reason is mainly from the judge's applicable legal reasoning environment and system level to carry on the analysis. In the aspect of applicable legal reasoning environment, judges are influenced by the current conviction reasoning mode, the traditional concept of "light sentencing" and the independence of trial. The function of legal document guidance also has limitation. The above reasons together led to the lack of legal reasoning in the application of the judgment. Through the above analysis, the author puts forward some suggestions to solve the legal reasoning problem of judgment application from two angles: positive and side, combined with the background of the current judicial reform. Specifically, the positive suggestion is to construct a new model of applicable legal reasoning, which mainly starts from clarifying the constitution of conviction and sentencing applicable legal reasoning. Establish the evaluation mechanism of applicable legal reasoning and perfect the judgment answering mechanism.
【学位授予单位】：沈阳师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.2
本文编号：2220878
[Abstract]:Application of legal reasoning is an important content of judgment reasoning, which is composed of applicable legal reasoning of conviction and applicable legal reasoning of sentencing, and is an explanation of the process of applying the law to solve the problem of conviction and sentencing. In practice, the applicable legal reasoning of most criminal judgments is too simple, which leads to insufficient reasoning and low acceptability of the whole judgment. Over the past decade, judgment reasoning has not improved. The research from the aspect of applicable legal reasoning is not only the innovation of the research angle, but also helps to make the judgment reasoning appear more concretely and to improve the rationality of judgment. In addition, the study of the legal reasoning of judgment application can also contribute to the current judicial reform. Based on the judgment of Yan Xiaotian and other three cases, this paper analyzes the applicable legal reasoning. Through analysis, it is found that there are problems in the applicable legal reasoning of the three judgments. The specific manifestations are: the conviction is mainly lack of legal provisions of the display and explanation, the analysis of the crime is inadequate; sentencing is reflected in the application of the main punishment of inadequate reasoning, the application of supplementary punishment is abnormally light. The causes of these problems are internal and external. The internal reason is mainly the judge's own reason, mainly has two aspects. First, the judges have insufficient understanding of the audience scope of applicable law reasoning and lack of clear understanding of the reasoning needs of various audience groups. Second, when the judge applies the legal reasoning specifically, he does not realize the function of the legal interest analysis in the application of the law reasoning, which is manifested in the following aspects: conviction, neglecting the role of the legal interest analysis in the determination of the crime, the crime and the other crime. In the aspect of sentencing, the function of legal interest analysis in determining sentencing interval is ignored. The external reason is mainly from the judge's applicable legal reasoning environment and system level to carry on the analysis. In the aspect of applicable legal reasoning environment, judges are influenced by the current conviction reasoning mode, the traditional concept of "light sentencing" and the independence of trial. The function of legal document guidance also has limitation. The above reasons together led to the lack of legal reasoning in the application of the judgment. Through the above analysis, the author puts forward some suggestions to solve the legal reasoning problem of judgment application from two angles: positive and side, combined with the background of the current judicial reform. Specifically, the positive suggestion is to construct a new model of applicable legal reasoning, which mainly starts from clarifying the constitution of conviction and sentencing applicable legal reasoning. Establish the evaluation mechanism of applicable legal reasoning and perfect the judgment answering mechanism.
【学位授予单位】：沈阳师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.2
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 周芳芳;;论刑事判决说理的“私人订制”——从一份“伟大”的判决书说起[J];东方法学;2016年03期
2 焦悦勤;;刑事判决书量刑说理现状调查及改革路径研究[J];河北法学;2016年02期
3 雷小政;;刑事裁判文书说理的困境与出路:以死刑案件为分析样本[J];中国社会科学院研究生院学报;2015年06期
4 王利荣;张孟东;;判罚结论的理性证立——由量刑说理切入[J];法律科学(西北政法大学学报);2015年06期
5 凌斌;;法官如何说理:中国经验与普遍原理[J];中国法学;2015年05期
6 董静洁;陈志刚;;刑事司法公开的维度与限度[J];河北法学;2015年06期
7 周光权;;判决充分说理与刑事指导案例制度[J];法律适用;2014年06期
8 孙万怀;;公开固然重要,说理更显公正——“公开三大平台”中刑事裁判文书公开之局限[J];现代法学;2014年02期
9 孙智超;;中德两国判决书制作风格初探[J];刑事法评论;2013年02期
10 魏胜强;;当面说理、强化修辞与重点推进——关于提高我国判决书制作水平的思考[J];法律科学(西北政法大学学报);2012年05期
相关重要报纸文章 前3条
1 刘树德;;增强裁判说理的当下意义[N];人民法院报;2013年
2 王聪;秦川;;判决书制作的说理之道[N];人民法院报;2011年
3 杨兴培;;若在国外,李昌奎判决书该如何写[N];法制日报;2011年
相关博士学位论文 前1条
1 唐世齐;刑事判决说理制度研究[D];吉林大学;2012年
，本文编号：2220878
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2220878.html
