独立预备犯研究

发布时间：2018-04-16 16:04

本文选题：独立预备犯 + 预备行为实行化　；参考：《安徽大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着《刑法修正案(九)》的颁布,独立预备犯开始受到我国学者关注。在此之前,我国将预备犯规定在刑法第22条:"为了犯罪,准备工具、制造条件的,是犯罪预备。对于预备犯,可以比照既遂犯从轻、减轻处罚或者免除处罚。"而《刑法修正案(九)》新增了准备实施恐怖活动罪,通过分则的规定将原本恐怖活动的预备行为转化为准备实施恐怖活动罪的实行行为,独立成罪,从形式上打破了我国传统预备犯的规定,这类罪名被学者称为独立预备犯。也正因为如此,我国刑法理论界在此之前对独立预备犯并没有做深入的研究,对独立预备犯的概念、设立依据以及一些理论认定都没有形成系统的理论成果。因此,需要从这几个方面对独立预备犯进行理论研究,为立法与司法实践提供支撑与指导。在风险社会的背景下,世界上绝大多数大陆法系国家也早已在其刑法中设立独立预备犯以保护重大法益。我国同样也已经进入风险社会,在风险社会中人们对于风险的恐惧也让人们对于安全的追求更为强烈,并开始希望法律能在这种风险产生结果之前就让其得到有效的控制。独立预备犯,不仅表现出刑法对侵害重要法益的犯罪的提前介入,也体现出国家对于重大法益的严密保护,能够有效地对风险进行防控,这也是独立预备犯在我国刑法分则中设立的重要依据之一。此外,我国刑法总则中预备犯普遍处罚原则与司法实践中对预备犯较少处罚的冲突体现出了司法机关的理性选择。相较备受争议的普遍处罚原则而言,司法机关的理性选择无疑更符合当代的刑法理论与刑法原则,而这种理性也应该反映在立法上,即规定相应的独立预备犯。除此之外,独立预备犯研究的重点还在于独立预备犯的认定,包括独立预备犯的实行行为、停止形态以及共犯形态的认定。预备行为与实行行为是截然不同的两个概念,在一般情况下两者有着明确的区分。但是在刑法分则规定了独立预备犯之后,被规定的预备行为向实行行为进行转化的情况却客观的存在。本文通过对预备行为与实行行为进行一定的分析,以阐明独立预备犯中原本预备行为向实行行为进行转化的原因与过程,并且对没有类型化的行为进行实质上的认定。在独立预备犯的停止形态中,本文主要对独立预备犯的既遂、未遂、预备与中止进行探讨。在我国刑法理论中,"着手"是既遂、未遂形成的核心条件,因此需要通过比较"着手"的不同学说,对独立预备犯的"着手'"进行判定,以认定其既遂与未遂。而对于犯罪预备与犯罪中止而言,不同国家也有着不同的规定,因此需要从我国现行立法与传统理论出发,阐明独立预备犯的预备与中止能否成立以及是否应该受到处罚。在独立预备犯的共犯形态中,本文首先在共犯从属性说以及行为共同说的基础上,对独立预备犯共同正犯的成立与否进行探讨。同时,独立预备犯的帮助行为与实行行为在实践中难以区别,本文从传统的理论入手,明确独立预备犯中帮助犯与共同正犯的界限,对帮助犯与共同正犯进行区分。在共犯中,除了共同正犯、帮助犯外,还需要通过传统理论证明其教唆犯的成立,并且对于两种教唆内容与实行行为不一致的情况进行探究。
[Abstract]:With the "criminal law amendment (nine)" the promulgation of independent preparatory crime and pay attention to the Chinese scholars. Prior to this, China will be the preparatory crime stipulated in the criminal law twenty-second: "for a crime preparation tool, the creation of the conditions for a crime. The crime in preparation, can be treated either commit a lighter, mitigated punishment or exempted from punishment." "criminal law amendment (nine)" new preparations for the implementation of terrorist crimes, through specific provisions the original terrorist activities into preparing for the implementation of preparatory acts of terrorism crime, a separate crime, from the form of breaking the provisions of China's traditional preparatory crime, this kind of crime is scholars called independent preparatory crime. Because of this, before China's criminal law theory of independent preparatory crime did not do in-depth research, the concept of independent preparatory crime, the establishment of the basis and some theories that have not formed the theoretical system into Fruit. Therefore, the need for independent preparatory crime theory research from these aspects, provide support and guidance for legislation and judicial practice. In the context of risk society, the vast majority of the world countries of continental law system has been set up in the independent preparatory in criminal law to protect the legal interests of major crime. China has also entered the risk in the society, risk society people fear for the risk also let the people for the pursuit of security is more intense, and began to hope that the law can result in before this risk is to be effectively controlled. The independent preparatory crime, not only the criminal law against the important interests of the crime of the early intervention, but also reflects the the state for strict protection granted legal interests, can effectively carry out prevention and control of risk, which is an important basis for the establishment of independent preparatory crime in China's criminal law in one. In addition, China's criminal law in general The preparatory crime punishment principle and common judicial practice of conflict less punishment of preparatory crime reflects the rational choice of judicial organs. Compared with the general principle of punishment is controversial, the rational choice of the judiciary is more in line with the theory of criminal law and the criminal law principle of the contemporary, and this kind of rationality should also be reflected in the legislation, the provisions of the corresponding the independent preparatory crime. In addition, the focus of the study is independent of preparation for a crime is that independent preparatory crime, including independent preparatory crime, stopping form and accomplice form. That behavior of preparing acts and the implementation of the two concepts are different, in general there is a clear distinction. But the provisions in the criminal law independent preparatory crime after being prescribed to conduct preparatory acts for the transformation of the situation is the objective existence. Based on the behavior and the implementation of bank reserve For some reason analysis, and the process of transformation to implement the behavior to clarify the independent preparatory crime in original preparation behavior, and no type of behavior identified in substance. In the form of stop independent preparatory crime, this paper focuses on the independent preparatory crime is attempted, then, preparation and suspension are discussed in our country criminal law theory, the "start" is accomplished, the core conditions of attempted formation, therefore need to compare different theories of "start", the independent preparatory crime "to" judge, to define accomplished and attempted. For suspension of preparation for a crime and crime, different countries have different rules, so you need to start from the current legislation of our country with the traditional theory, clarify the independent preparatory crime preparation and the suspension can be established and whether it should be punished. In the form of independent accomplice of the crime in preparation, this paper first in total Made from the property that, based on the theory of joint behavior, to explore the establishment of an independent preparatory crime accomplice or not. At the same time, help the behavior independent of the preparatory crime and the implementation behavior is indistinguishable in practice, this article from the traditional theory, clearly independent preparatory crime boundaries and help to make the joint principal offender, to help make the distinction and the common principal offender. In the accomplice, besides the common perpetrator, abettor, also need through traditional theory proved the instigator, and for the two kinds of abetting acts and the implementation of content inconsistencies are explored.

【学位授予单位】：安徽大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.1

【参考文献】