反思与重塑:刑法上类推解释禁止之研究

发布时间：2018-03-05 13:03

本文选题：类推解释　切入点：扩张解释　出处：《环球法律评论》2015年03期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：刑法解释的实质化,使得目的解释成为刑法解释的"桂冠",目的解释为类推解释开了一个口子,而类推解释又为目的解释提供了足以伸展的舞台。类推解释作为一种法律解释方法,具有独立的品格,学界对类推解释的禁止并不合理。类推适用、类推解释、类比推理三个概念相互缠绕,使得对类推解释的曲解和误读不断。通过对司法实例的检讨,可以发现当前对扩张解释与类推解释模糊地带的处理表现欠佳。类推解释独立品格的确立,需要依赖于两条至为重要的线索:形式逻辑和实质立场。前者在于解决类推解释在形式逻辑上的障碍,基于此,传统"禁止类推解释"命题被重新表述为类推解释内部"允许的类推解释"与"禁止的类推解释"命题;后者在于为类推解释提供实质的理论支撑,并回答类推解释与罪刑法定原则的关系。
[Abstract]:The essence of the interpretation of the criminal law makes the interpretation of the purpose a laureate of the interpretation of the criminal law, and the interpretation of the purpose opens a hole in the analogy interpretation. As a method of legal interpretation, analogy interpretation has an independent character, and the prohibition of analogy interpretation in academic circles is unreasonable. The three concepts of analogical reasoning intertwine each other, resulting in constant misinterpretation and misreading of analogies. It can be found that the current treatment of fuzzy areas of expansion interpretation and analogy interpretation is poor. The establishment of independent character of analogy interpretation, It depends on two most important clues: formal logic and substantive positions, which address the barriers to analogies in formal logic, based on which, The traditional propositions of "prohibited analogy interpretation" have been restated as "allowed analogy interpretation" and "prohibited analogy interpretation" within analogy interpretation, which is to provide theoretical support for analogy interpretation. And answer the relationship between analogy explanation and the principle of legality.
【作者单位】：清华大学法学院;
【分类号】：D914

【相似文献】