抽象危险犯的正当性与边界问题研究

发布时间：2018-03-16 03:15

本文选题：抽象危险犯　切入点：危险　出处：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：刑罚正当化的依据是刑法学的基本问题之一，也就是说，对于任何不法行为进行刑罚处罚都必须要有充分的理由。而抽象危险犯作为一种不需要实害结果与具体危险为构成要件的犯罪类型，对其正当性的考察更是必不可少，其存在边界也必须被严格限定。本文共三部分，正文3万余字。第一部分：抽象危险犯概述。本部分首先对危险犯的范围、抽象危险犯中的危险进行界定，同时对抽象危险犯、具体危险犯以及行为犯进行区分，以此明确本文所要探讨对象，即抽象危险犯的内涵与外延。其次，通过对《刑法修正案（八）》新增与修订的抽象危险犯立法例的立法目的进行还原与分析得出结论：基于保障民生的需要，我国刑事立法呈现出扩大抽象危险犯范围的立法趋势。并由此引发关于抽象危险犯正当性的思考。第二部分：抽象危险犯正当性的探求。这部分主要遵循宏观到微观，理论到现实的思路。首先，从刑法价值层面对抽象危险犯设置的正当性进行考察，认为抽象危险犯的设置体现了刑法着重秩序价值的实现，但结合我国具体国情分析认为，当前形势下刑法应当更注重对自由价值的保护。其次，从刑法精神及基本原则层面对抽象危险犯设置的正当性进行考察，，得出抽象危险犯的设置与刑法谦抑精神以及法益侵害原则都存在着一定的冲突的结论。再次，从风险社会这一现实背景出发对抽象危险犯设置的正当性进行考察，得出结论认为抽象危险犯的设置在风险防控能力上是存在疑问的，而且基于我国对违法行为二元立法规制的情况，可以考虑用行政处罚替代抽象危险犯的设置。最后，得出抽象危险犯的正当性真正根据仅是由于我国现实情况下，犯罪学与刑法学并没有实现分工的明确，刑法不得已的承担了部分犯罪预防的功能，还有就是基于立法技术的考虑，抽象危险犯才有存在的必要。综合这一部分的分析，笔者认为，抽象危险犯的设置仅存在着有限的正当性，并由此引出必须对其范围进行限定的讨论。第三部分：抽象危险犯边界的限定。这部分主要从立法与司法两大层面对抽象危险犯进行限制。从立法层面来讲，要求抽象危险犯的设置必需符合比例原则以及实证原则；在司法层面上，则主要是从解释论上要求对抽象危险犯的危险必需做实质解释，从诉讼程序上赋予被告人反证的权利。
[Abstract]:The justification of punishment is one of the basic problems in criminal law, that is to say, There must be sufficient reasons for punishment for any illegal act. As a type of crime which does not require the result of actual harm and the concrete danger, it is necessary to investigate the legitimacy of the crime. The boundary of existence must also be strictly defined. There are three parts in this paper, the text is more than 30,000 words. The first part: an overview of abstract dangerous crime. This part first defines the scope of the dangerous crime, the risk in the abstract dangerous crime, and at the same time distinguishes the abstract dangerous crime, the specific dangerous crime and the behavior crime. In order to clarify the object of this paper, that is, the connotation and extension of abstract dangerous crime. Secondly, Through the analysis of the legislative purpose of the new and revised abstract dangerous crime legislation in the Criminal Law Amendment (8), the conclusion is drawn: based on the need to protect the people's livelihood, The criminal legislation of our country shows the legislative trend of enlarging the scope of abstract dangerous crime, which leads to thinking about the legitimacy of abstract danger crime. The second part: the exploration of the legitimacy of the abstract dangerous crime. This part mainly follows the macroscopic to the microscopic, the theory to the reality mentality. First, from the criminal law value stratification plane carries on the investigation to the abstract dangerous crime establishment legitimacy, The author thinks that the establishment of abstract dangerous crime reflects the realization of order value in criminal law, but according to the actual situation of our country, the criminal law should pay more attention to the protection of freedom value under the current situation. Secondly, From the aspect of the spirit and basic principle of criminal law, the author investigates the legitimacy of the setting of abstract dangerous crime, and draws the conclusion that the setting of abstract dangerous crime is in conflict with the modest spirit of criminal law and the principle of infringement of legal interests. Starting from the realistic background of risk society, this paper investigates the legitimacy of the establishment of abstract dangerous crime, and concludes that the setting of abstract dangerous crime is in doubt on the ability of risk prevention and control. Furthermore, based on the dualistic legislative regulation of illegal acts in our country, we can consider replacing the establishment of abstract dangerous crime with administrative punishment. Finally, we can draw the conclusion that the justification of abstract dangerous crime is only due to the actual situation in our country. Criminology and criminal law do not realize the division of labor clearly, criminal law has to bear part of the function of crime prevention, and based on the consideration of legislative technology, abstract dangerous crime has the necessity to exist. Comprehensive analysis of this part, The author believes that there is only limited legitimacy in the setting of abstract dangerous crime, which leads to the discussion that the scope must be limited. The third part: the limitation of the boundary of the abstract dangerous crime. This part mainly limits the abstract dangerous crime from the legislative and judicial levels. From the legislative level, it requires that the establishment of the abstract dangerous crime must conform to the principle of proportionality and the principle of demonstration. On the judicial level, it is mainly from the theory of interpretation that the danger of the abstract dangerous crime must be explained substantively, and the defendant has the right to testify against it from the legal procedure.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.1

【参考文献】