论犯罪未遂的处罚根据

发布时间：2017-12-27 18:35

本文关键词：论犯罪未遂的处罚根据　出处：《吉林大学》2016年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：根据客观主义的立场,犯罪的本质是行为对国家所保护的利益价值的侵害或危险。刑罚的目的在于寻求公正,国家发动刑罚的实质是剥夺了犯罪分子的某种法益,是为了国家、社会和其他个人法益而要求犯罪人不得已做出的牺牲。犯罪未遂处罚根据的理论存在主观主义、客观主义、折中主义以及我国的主客观相统一理论的对立。主观主义理论认为行为人主观方面的意思、人格、动机的危险是科处刑罚的基础,应予惩罚的不是犯罪行为本身,而是犯罪人。主观主义过度重视社会秩序的保护,扩张了未遂犯的存在范围,与刑法所保护的是法益的立场相违背。客观主义理论认为犯罪是行为人的行为对刑法所保护的法益的侵害和危险。客观主义重视行为的概念,并相应的把保护法益看做是刑法的任务。客观主义理论将刑法视为保护法益的最后一道防线,起到了对刑罚权的合理规范和制约的作用,消除了刑罚适用中的不确定现象,是解释犯罪未遂处罚根据的较为妥当的理论。折中主义理论(印象理论)认为犯罪未遂的处罚根据在于行为人的行为动摇了公众对法秩序的信赖,强调犯罪未遂必不可少的两个条件:行为人的犯罪意思和行为动摇法秩序的印象。由于印象理论舍弃了犯罪的本质要素,即行为的法益侵害性,因此印象理论偏向了主观主义,并且使公众产生了法秩序的动摇的印象是一种是主观的存在,没有具体的可操作性。我国刑法学者以主客观相统一的原则为指导思想,认为犯罪未遂犯承担刑事责任的根据在其具备了犯罪构成四个方面的要件,但这只是做了表层分析,犯罪未遂不是犯罪构成要件的修正,而是犯罪构成要件要素的修正。通过相关理论的评析,可以初步得出客观主义理论在解释犯罪未遂处罚根据时是较为妥当的。又根据对犯罪未遂行为危险的判断不同,客观主义犯罪未遂理论又可分为具体危险说和客观危险说。具体危险说以一般人所能认识到的情况以及行为人所特别认识到的情况为基础,根据一般人是否感受到结果发生的危险来判断危险性有无。由于该理论不当地把握未遂犯的处罚根据,容易扩大未遂犯的处罚范围,混淆了违法与责任的判断等原因,因而是不可取的。客观危险说的基本主张是:对危险进行判断时应该考虑可能影响结果的一切情况,从客观的立场出发综合所有因素进行判断。客观危险说由于坚持事后判断,强调未遂犯中的危险是已经造成法益的确定的、现实的危险,所以其缩小了未遂犯的处罚范围,实现了刑法的保障人权功能。但是有批评意见认为坚持客观危险说可能得出所有的未遂犯都是不能犯的结论,并且客观危险说判断危险的标准并不明确。笔者通过分析认为客观危险说的这种事后危险在哲学上属于抽象的可能,而判断的标准就是全部客观事实是否包含阻止结果发生的具有随机性、易变性的因素。客观危险说以纯粹的客观危险作为犯罪未遂的处罚根据,确保了刑罚适用的客观标准,具有刑罚适用的正当性,因此应当提倡。
[Abstract]:According to the standpoint of objectivism, the essence of the crime is the infringement or danger of the act on the value of the interests protected by the state. The purpose of punishment is to seek justice. The essence of a state's punishment is to deprive criminals of certain legal interests, which is for the state, society and other personal interests to require criminals to make sacrifices. The theory of the punishment based on the attempted crime has the opposition of subjectivism, objectivism, compromise and the unity of the subjective and objective theory of our country. Subjectivism theory believes that the risk of the subjective aspects of human behavior, personality, motivation is the foundation to be punished, should be punished is not a crime itself, but the crime. Subjectivism overviews the protection of the social order and expands the scope of the attempted offense, which is contrary to the position of the legal interests protected by the criminal law. The theory of objectivism holds that crime is the infringement and danger of the act of the perpetrator on the legal interests protected by the criminal law. Objectivism pays attention to the concept of behavior and regards the protection of legal benefits as the task of criminal law. Objectivism theory regards criminal law as the last line of defense for protecting legal interests. It plays a role in regulating and restricting the penalty power. It eliminates the uncertainty in the application of penalty, and it is a more appropriate theory to explain the punishment basis of attempted crime. The theory of eclecticism (impression theory) holds that the punishment basis for attempted crime is that the behavior of the actor has shaken the public's trust in the law order, and emphasized the two essential conditions for attempted crime: the impression of the criminal's intention and behavior to shake the law order. Because the theory of impression has abandoned the essential elements of crime, that is, the violation of legal interests, so the impression theory has been biased towards subjectivism, and it has caused the public to shake the impression of legal order. It is subjective existence and no concrete operability. China's criminal law scholars to the unity of subjective and objective principle as the guiding ideology that attempted crime committed criminal responsibility according to the requirements in four aspects of crime constitution, but this is only done surface analysis, correction elements of attempted crime is not a crime, but the crime constitution essential factors correction. Through the analysis of relevant theories, it is possible to conclude that the theory of objectivism is more appropriate in explaining the punishment of attempted crime. According to the different judgment of the risk of attempted crime, the theory of objectivism crime attempted can be divided into concrete danger and objective danger. The specific danger is based on the situation that most people can recognize and the situation that the actor especially recognizes. Due to the improper grasp of the punishment basis of attempted offense, it is easy to expand the punishment scope of attempted offenders, and confuse the reasons of illegality and responsibility judgment, so it is not advisable. The basic idea of the objective danger theory is that when we judge the danger, we should consider all the circumstances that may affect the result. We should take all factors into account from the objective standpoint. The objective danger theory insists that the risk of attempted offense is determined and dangerous because of insisting on afterwards judgement. Therefore, it narrowed the punishment scope of attempted offense and realized the function of criminal law to protect human rights. But there is a critical opinion that insisting on objective danger may come to the conclusion that all attempted offenders can not be committed, and the objective danger is not clear. The author thinks that the ex post danger of objective danger is an abstract possibility in philosophy, and the criterion of judgement is whether all objective facts contain the random and changeable factors that prevent the result. The objective danger theory is based on the pure objective danger as the punishment basis for attempted crime, which ensures the objective standard of penalty application, and has the legitimacy of penalty application. Therefore, it should be promoted.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D914

【相似文献】