论“致人失踪”的刑法后果

发布时间：2018-01-28 17:00

本文关键词： 致人失踪刑法规制危害结果死亡认定司法解释　出处：《大连海事大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：人员失踪这种结果状态在民事法律上有宣告失踪和宣告死亡的制度加以规制,而在刑事法律上,对人身的犯罪结果只有死亡和重伤,对“人员失踪”的情形没有明确的制度规定。因此,在司法实践中,司法机关在对出现致人失踪结果的案件进行判处时找不到直接的法律依据,判决结果出现了不统一的情况,主要司法模式有：致人失踪的结果不构成犯罪进而不进行刑事追究；伴随死亡结果,对人员失踪的结果忽略不计；以民事宣告死亡作为依据追究刑事责任；法院推定死亡后进行定罪宣判。严格说来,致人失踪作为一种新呈现的非死亡、非重伤的结果,其并不是刑事实体法的研究对象,而是刑事诉讼程序中缺少证据加以证实的法律事实,实体法律对其有所忽略可以理解。但近年来出现致人失踪这种结果的刑事案件越来越多,没有明确的法律加以指引势必造成司法混乱、处判不公的结果。针对致人失踪这一结果进行刑法规制需要区分不同案件类型。发生在陆地上的案件大多属于事故型案件,这类案件失踪人员生还希望几乎为零,等同于死亡,通过收集证据形成证据链条足以证明死亡事实的存在,因此这类案件需要采取对失踪人员进行死亡认定的程序后,依据死亡人数进行刑事责任的追究；而发生在水上的案件则不适宜采取陆地上完整证据链认定死亡的方式,因为水上环境具有流动性、不封闭性,落水的人员除遭遇极致环境难以生存外,其余情况下不能排除生存的可能性,收集证据组成证据链条证明死亡这一证据手段在水上环境中的操作性也非常之低,出于保护犯罪嫌疑人的生命、自由权利的慎重考虑,应采用在司法解释中加入失踪这一结果,与死亡、重伤并列成为构成犯罪的结果形式,如此一来既保证犯罪行为的有效追究又切实保障犯罪嫌疑人的权益。
[Abstract]:The result state of missing person is regulated by the system of declaration of disappearance and declaration of death in civil law, but in criminal law, the result of crime of person is only death and serious injury. There is no clear system of "missing persons". Therefore, in judicial practice, the judicial authorities can not find a direct legal basis when sentencing a case that results in the disappearance of a person. The result of judgment is not uniform, the main judicial models are: the result of disappearance does not constitute a crime, and no criminal investigation; With the result of death, the result of missing person is ignored; To investigate criminal responsibility on the basis of civil declaration of death; Strictly speaking, as a new result of non-death and non-serious injury, it is not the research object of criminal substantive law. But the lack of evidence in criminal proceedings to prove the legal facts, the substantive law to ignore it understandable. But in recent years there have been more and more criminal cases resulting in the disappearance of such a result. The lack of clear legal guidance is bound to lead to judicial confusion. It is necessary to distinguish different types of cases according to the result of criminal law. Most cases occurring on land are accident cases. The survival of missing persons in such cases is expected to be almost zero, equating to death, and the chain of evidence generated by the collection of evidence is sufficient to prove the existence of the fact of the death. Such cases therefore require criminal accountability based on the number of deaths following the adoption of procedures for the determination of the death of missing persons; The case occurred on the water is not suitable to adopt the complete evidence chain on land to determine the way of death, because the water environment is mobile, not closed, the people who fall into the water are difficult to survive in addition to the extreme environment. Other circumstances can not rule out the possibility of survival, the collection of evidence to form a chain of evidence to prove the death of the evidence means in the aquatic environment is also very low operational, out of the protection of the lives of suspects. Careful consideration of the right to liberty should include the result of disappearance in the judicial interpretation, along with death and serious injury, as the result of the crime. In this way, both to ensure the effective investigation of criminal acts and effectively protect the rights and interests of criminal suspects.
【学位授予单位】：大连海事大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D914

【参考文献】