正当防卫若干问题研究

发布时间：2018-03-02 07:29

本文关键词： 正当防卫防卫意思防卫对象注意规定　出处：《深圳大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：正当防卫既是人的自卫本能,也是保护法益的必要的私力救济手段之一。因此,国家通过制定法的形式在一定程度及范围内允许甚至鼓励正当防卫行为。以往的国内论文论述正当防卫时,采取传统犯罪论体系进行论述的较为多见。本文以三阶层体系来分析正当防卫,并从法益衡量的角度,来发现正当防卫的特色。当然,犯罪论体系的不同,并不当然导致在认定正当防卫问题上出现不同的结论,但不同的犯罪论体系会给人以不同的视角来对同一个问题进行考察。本文从正当防卫阻却违法的根据的角度及相关问题的展开,提出一些自己的见解,对一些一直存有争议的相关问题进行研究。本文共分四个部分。第一部分以正当防卫的正当化根据作为本文的逻辑起点,并以此入手对国内外的一些学术观点进行评述分析,本文认为将结果无价值论的法益衡量说作为正当防卫的正当化根据较为妥当。第二部分对防卫意思的必要说、不要说予以展开,对不具有防卫意思的防卫行为能否构成正当防卫进行讨论。第三部分对精神病人及未成年人等无刑事责任能力人的不法侵害能否实施正当防卫进行展开。第四部分对《刑法》第20条第3款规定的特殊防卫进行分析,对无限防卫权的提法提出质疑,并试图论证该款规定仅为注意规定。
[Abstract]:Legitimate defense is not only the instinct of self-defense of human beings, but also one of the necessary means of private relief for the interests of the law of protection. The state allows and even encourages justifiable defense to a certain extent and to a certain extent by way of enacting laws. This paper analyzes the legitimate defense with the three-class system, and finds the characteristics of the legitimate defense from the angle of legal interest measurement. Of course, there are differences in the criminal theory system. It does not, of course, lead to different conclusions on the question of asserting legitimate defence. However, different crime theory systems will give people different perspectives to examine the same problem. This paper puts forward some opinions from the angle of the basis of legitimate defense against the violation of the law and the development of related problems. This paper is divided into four parts. The first part is based on the justification of self-defense as the logical starting point of this paper, and from this point of view, some academic viewpoints at home and abroad are reviewed and analyzed. This paper holds that it is more appropriate to use the theory of legal interest measurement of the result without value as the justification basis of legitimate defense. The second part is about the necessity of defense meaning, not to say that it should be carried out. The third part discusses whether the defense behavior with no defense meaning can constitute legitimate defense. The third part is about whether the illegal infringement of persons without criminal responsibility, such as mental patients and minors, can carry out legitimate defense. 4th parts. An analysis of the special defence provided for in article 20, paragraph 3, of the Criminal Code, The reference to unlimited right of defence is questioned, and an attempt is made to argue that this provision is only a requirement of care.
【学位授予单位】：深圳大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.1

【相似文献】