量刑情节的分类

发布时间：2018-04-23 15:15

本文选题：量刑情节 + 分类标准　；参考：《西南财经大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：量刑情节在我国刑法条文中主要体现在刑法的61条,同时也是量刑情节适用的原则,但是条文的规定使其本身具有一定的模糊性不利于量刑情节在司法实践中的正确把握,因此极易产生量刑偏差。这就需要对量刑情节的分类在抓住其本质属性即在事实与价值的角度的基础上进行新的分类,以适应不断变化发展的司法实践。量刑情节在刑法中的重要作用是不言而喻的,而量刑情节能否在司法实践中得到恰如其分的适用,直接关系到国家的长治久安和社会稳定。因为量刑的不公正会直接损害公平正义,司法的权威形象,也很容易导致受害者、罪犯以及他们的亲属,动摇对司法公正的信心。而实现量刑的公正有利于解决司法和法治社会出现的规则冲突。量刑则是建立在公正司法的基础上的每一个具体的案件的综合考量,并且需要特定的案件中量刑时需要要考虑的,并不需要考虑诸如累犯、立功和未成年人犯罪等和许多其他与罪行无关的量刑情节。这样的量刑情节主要决定了刑事责任的大小并直接影响到量刑的轻重。因此,对于在一种特定的情况下,罪行的严重程度基本上决定了一个基本的刑事责任的大小,而不是决定刑事责任的唯一基础的大小,换句话说,当有与行为人无关的量刑与犯罪人所犯的罪并行时,重罪轻判和轻罪重判是合理的,不是量刑不公。所以作者认为,“重罪重判,轻罪轻判,罚当其罪”并非量刑公正的内涵；相反,这一表述容易误导审判人员忽视罪外量刑情节的作用,反而不利于量刑公正的实现。尤其是近些年,随着人民群众对司法的快速增长的需求变得越来越高以及中国法治制度的进步与完善,因此能否正确量刑会对量刑结果造成不同程度的影响,同时对于量刑情节理论的研究也是现代刑法中最应该解决和完善的理论问题。量刑情节的分类有利于正确适用量刑情节也有助于量刑公正的实现,同时也利于实现罪刑均衡的刑法理想状态。本文试图在对量刑情节分类的理论基础之上,从事实与价值的角度提出构建量刑情节分类的具体方式。作者主张建立以事实判断为主价值判断为辅的分类标准对量刑情节进行类型化的分类。本文试图在按照以上思路的指导下,主要从以下几个部分展开。本文第一部分是导论,主要包括文章的研究目的与意义,本文的研究思路,本文的研究方法。第二部分量刑情节分类的理论基础。任何学科离开了其最基本的理论基础,都将成为“无源之水,无本之本”。这部分主要包括量刑情节分类的价值基础法学客观基础、主观基础、实践基础以及在对比各种传统学说的基础上对量刑情节的内涵进行了重新界定。因为犯罪论是追求社会价值的,从价值理论的角度看,社会与刑法、犯罪论之间围绕社会是否安全形成并实现着不同状态和程度的价值关系。“法学主要是研究价值的至少常常涉及价值的问题”。其中,任何社会都具有的由处于主导地位的科学技术决定的基本特征即或者具体性或者抽象化,在总体上决定着社会对自身安全的基本要求,表达了该社会对安全能够忍受的最低限度,是不同时期社会安全的核心利益之所在,基本特征的差异一定会影响并决定刑法中的犯罪制度,并因为社会基本特征的原因导致犯罪论之间出现体系性的差异。为后文的展开打下理论基础。量刑情节的客观基础主要体现为社会的危害性。社会危害性的大小反映了犯罪的的事实并作为量刑的依据,它在量刑情节的基础理论里面具有很强的功用。作为量刑的客观基础的社会危害性主要是通过社会危害性达到的量来指导实际审判中法官的自由裁量的。社会危害性作为我国刑法理论中的一个基础概念,不仅在犯罪论而且在刑事责任论和刑罚论中广泛使用,主要是社会危害性是一个放之犯罪论和刑罚论而皆准的概念,相对地客观且具有明确性和针对性。量刑情节的主观基础表现为犯罪人的人身危险性。人身危险性是近代刑法学派理论中独创的概念,同时也是近代学派刑法理论的基石。在量刑时根据犯罪人的人身危险性判处不同的刑罚在世界各国几乎是通例。这只体现了罪刑相适应原则,又体现了罪责相适应的原则。量刑情节的实践基础主要体现在法官的自由裁量权上。因为作为刑罚裁量的一部分,量刑情节的适用过程,法官的自由裁量权是指法官审判刑事案件过程中所拥有或行使的自由裁量权,它包括刑事实体法和刑事程序法两方面的自由裁量权。那些有关法官刑事自由裁量权的实质内容,我国法学界目前还没有统一的认识。但是任何法定刑都存在一定的刑罚裁量范围,法官代表国家在这一范围内决定宣告刑,刑罚裁量权主要由国家代为行使。因此对量刑情节的内涵进行重新界定是极为重要的。量刑情节是我国刑法中情节的一种。它的概念实质上并没有在刑法中得到明确的规定,只是学者们在理论上进行的探讨。因为量刑情节是对犯罪分子落实刑事责任和实现刑罚个别化的基础。因此准确界定和落实量刑情节的概念至关重要。目前学界对量刑情节这一概念仅具有最基本的理解,也比较容易接受。本文在此基础上综合了传统学说的几种观点对量刑情节对比分析了最符合量刑情节本质属性的定义。第三部分主要是对量刑情节进行新的分类。首先综合对比对传统刑法理论中关于对量刑情节的分类从对比不同学说的基础上作了系统分析。在分析对比了传统刑法中九种观点的基础上总结现有理论存在的缺陷：学界对量刑情节的分类大体上就是以上9种观点,可以说学者的这些观点基本上是相类似的,也从不同的侧面反映了我国现阶段刑法理论中量刑情节理论的学术成就,很有借鉴意义,尽管从形式上看,这些观点并没有什么不对的,但从实质上看,作者认为它们的缺陷是显而易见的,即并没有解决和回答量刑情节分类的实质。在法定刑的限度内什么样的量刑情是从宽,什么样的量刑情节是从严,什么样的情节是从轻,什么样的情节又是减轻呢?这些都没有说清楚。因此作者提出在抓住事物的本质属性即事实与价值的角度对量刑情节进行分类,首先先确定量刑情节分类的标准,犯罪事实标准与社会危害性标准,前者是事实的,后者是价值的,也是休谟所提的“是与应该”的不同标准；前者是抽象的,易于立法者的展开和运用,后者是个别的,易于司法权的展开和运用。因此确定量刑情节分类的标准是正确分类的前提,应当首先明确量刑情节的分类标准。引出事实的判断标准和价值的判断标准。事实的判断标准是以客体为取向的。得出事实判断的或许是某人或某些人,但事实判断如果是正确的,即事实真理,那么它是不以人的意志为专一的,是具有普遍性的,即适合于所有人的。刑法中量刑情节的价值判断标准是量刑情节中的价值层面的范畴是由行为人主体和法益客体组成的。犯罪是最终具有社会危害性的价值事件,但由于犯罪的规范标准的差异,它存在后者社会意义或者事实意义的可能。当犯罪需要价值判断的规范标准是,’社会危害性充当了规范的标准。在事实判断导出价值判断的过程中,作为前提的事实判断是客观的不以主体意志为转移的,但作为结论的价值判断却可能因推导具有主体性特征、作为推理结论的价值判断也具有主体性,是与主体有关的真缘故。也就是说,推理是其自身独特的目的、利益与需要等,从一些事实前提当然就可推导出带有主体性的结论。价值这个普遍的概念是从人们对待满足他们需要的外界物的关系中产生的。并以事实判断标准与价值判断的标准进行分析。确定事实情节与价值情节的两种分类方式。第四部分主要是量刑情节体系的建立。首先分析我国现阶段量刑失衡严重的现状并通过类型化的具体方式明确建立量刑情节体系的重要与迫切。作者提出应该确立量刑情节体系的类型化,以及提出建立量刑情节体系类型化的意义,最后提出构建量刑情节体系类型化的具体方式。
[Abstract]:The sentence of sentencing is mainly embodied in 61 articles of criminal law in our country's criminal law, and it is also the principle of the application of the circumstances of the sentencing. However, the provisions of the provisions make it not conducive to the correct grasp of the sentencing circumstances in the judicial practice, so it is very easy to produce the sentencing deviation. This requires the classification of the sentencing circumstances to seize it. The essential attribute is a new classification based on the perspective of fact and value in order to adapt to the changing judicial practice.
The important role of the sentencing circumstances in the criminal law is self-evident, and the circumstances of the sentencing can be properly applied in the judicial practice, which is directly related to the long-term stability and social stability of the country. Because the injustice of sentencing will directly damage the fairness and justice, the authority of the judiciary, and can easily lead to victims, criminals and them. The relatives shaken the confidence of the justice of the judiciary.
The realization of the justice of sentencing is conducive to the settlement of the conflict of rules in the judiciary and the rule of law. Sentencing is a comprehensive consideration of every specific case based on a fair judiciary, and needs to be considered in a specific case of sentencing, and it does not need to be considered as recidivism, meritorious service and juvenile delinquency and so on. Other sentencing circumstances are not related to the crime. Such a sentencing plot mainly determines the size of the criminal responsibility and directly affects the severity of the sentencing. Therefore, in a particular case, the severity of the crime basically determines the size of a basic criminal responsibility, not the only basis for determining the criminal responsibility. In other words, when there is a parallel between the sentencing and the crime committed by the perpetrator, the heavy conviction and the misdemeanor are reasonable, not the injustice of the sentencing. Therefore, the author believes that the connotation of "heavy conviction, misdemeanor and punishment as a crime" is not the connotation of sentencing justice; on the contrary, this expression may mislead the trial personnel to ignore the sentencing circumstances outside the crime. In recent years, in recent years, as the people's demand for the rapid growth of the judiciary has become more and more high and the rule of law in China is progresses and perfected, the correct sentencing will affect the sentencing results in varying degrees, and the study of the theory of sentencing is also modern. The theoretical problem that should be solved and perfected most in the criminal law.
The classification of the circumstances of the sentencing is beneficial to the correct application of the circumstances of sentencing and the realization of the impartiality of sentencing. At the same time, it is also conducive to the realization of the ideal state of criminal law. This article tries to put forward a specific way of constructing the classification of sentencing and sentencing on the basis of the theory of the classification of sentencing circumstances.
The author advocates classifying the circumstances of sentencing by establishing a classification standard supplemented by fact judgment and value judgment.
Under the guidance of the above ideas, this article mainly launches from the following parts.
The first part of this paper is an introduction, which mainly includes the purpose and significance of the article, the research ideas of this paper, and the research methods of this article.
The second part is the theoretical basis of the classification of the sentencing plot. Any subject, leaving its basic theoretical basis, will become "the water of the passive, no book". This part mainly includes the objective basis of the value basic law, the subjective foundation, the practical basis and the sentencing plot on the basis of the comparison of the various traditional theories. The connotation is redefined.
Because the theory of crime is the pursuit of social value, from the point of view of the theory of value, the relationship between society and criminal law and the theory of criminology forms and realizes the value relation of different states and degrees. "Law is mainly a problem of value at least," in which any society has a dominant position. The basic characteristics, or concreteness or abstraction of the scientific and technological decision, determine the basic requirements of the society on its own security in general, and express the minimum limit that the society can endure to security. It is the core interest of the social security in different periods, and the differences in basic characteristics will affect and determine the criminal in the criminal law. The system of crime, which leads to systematic differences between the theory of crime because of the basic social characteristics, lays a theoretical foundation for the development of the latter. The objective basis of the sentencing plot is mainly embodied in the harmfulness of the society. The size of the social harmfulness reflects the facts of the crime and is the basis for the sentencing, and it is the basic theory of the circumstances of the sentencing. The social harmfulness of the objective basis of sentencing is mainly to guide the discretion of the judges in the actual trial by the amount of social harmfulness. The social harmfulness is a basic concept in the criminal theory of our country, which is not only widely used in the theory of crime but also in the theory of criminal responsibility and the theory of penal punishment. The main reason is that the social harmfulness is a concept which is universally applicable to criminal theory and penalty theory. It is relatively objective and clear and pertinent. The subjective basis of the sentencing plot is the personal danger of the criminal. Personal danger is the original concept in the modern criminal law school theory, and it is also the cornerstone of the modern school of criminal law theory. According to the personal dangerousness of the criminal, the sentence is almost a common example in the world. It embodies the principle of adaptation to crime and the principle of adaptation to the crime. The practical basis of the circumstances of the sentencing is mainly embodied in the discretion of the judge. As part of the penalty discretion, the circumstances of the sentencing are applicable. The judge's discretion refers to the discretion of the judge in the process of criminal cases. It includes the right of discretion in two aspects of the criminal substantive law and the criminal procedure law. There is a certain range of penalty discretion, and the judge declares the sentence on behalf of the state in this scope, and the discretion of the penalty is mainly exercised by the state. Therefore, it is very important to redefine the connotation of the circumstances of the sentencing.
The plot of sentencing is one of the plots in the criminal law of our country. Its concept is not clearly defined in the criminal law, but it is only a theoretical discussion by scholars. Because the sentencing plot is the basis for the criminal responsibility to be carried out and the individualization of the penalty, the exact definition and implementation of the concept of the sentencing circumstances is critical. At present, the academic circle has only the most basic understanding of the concept of the sentencing plot and is easy to accept. On this basis, this paper combines several viewpoints of the traditional theory to the comparative analysis of the definition of the essential attribute of the sentencing plot.
The third part is mainly to make a new classification of the sentencing plot. First, a systematic analysis is made on the basis of the comparison of the classification of the sentencing circumstances in the traditional criminal law theory on the basis of the comparison of the contrast of the classmate. In general, the class is the above 9 points of view. It can be said that the views of the scholars are basically similar. They also reflect the academic achievements of the theory of sentencing plot in the present stage of criminal law in China. The defect is obvious, that is, it does not solve and answer the essence of the classification of the sentencing plot. In the limit of the legal penalty, what kind of sentencing is lenient, what kind of sentencing plot is strict, what kind of plot is light, what kind of plot is mitigated? These are not clear. So the author put forward to seize the thing in the book. The qualitative attribute is the classification of the sentencing plot in the perspective of fact and value, first of all, to determine the standard of the classification of the sentencing plot first, the criminal fact standard and the social harmfulness standard, the former is the fact, the latter is the value, and it is also the different standard of "is and should" proposed by Hume; the former is abstract and easy to carry out and apply the legislator. The latter is other, and it is easy to carry out and apply the judicial power. Therefore, the criteria for the classification of the sentencing circumstances are the premise of the correct classification, and the classification standards of the sentencing circumstances should be first defined.
The criterion of judgment and the standard of judgment of value. The criterion of the fact is oriented by the object. It may be that the fact is judged by someone or someone, but if the fact is correct, that is, the truth is true, then it is not exclusive to human will and is universal, that is, the amount of the criminal law. The value judgment standard of the criminal plot is the category of the value level in the sentencing plot, which is composed of the subject of the actor and the object of the legal interest. The crime is the eventual value event with social harmfulness, but it has the possibility of the social meaning or the fact meaning of the latter due to the difference of the standard of the crime.
When a crime needs a standard standard of value judgment, the social harmfulness acts as a standard. In the process of judging the value of the fact, the fact judgment as the premise is not transferred by the subjective will, but the value judgment of the conclusion may be derived from the subjective characteristic, as the price of the reasoning conclusion. The value judgment also has the subjectivity, which is the true cause related to the subject. That is to say, the reasoning is its own unique purpose, the interests and the needs and so on. From some facts preconditions, of course, it can deduce the conclusion with the subjectivity. The universal concept of value is derived from the relationship between people and the external objects that meet the needs of the people. The standard of real judgment and the criterion of value judgement are analyzed. Two classifications of facts and value plots are determined.
The fourth part is mainly the establishment of the sentencing plot system. First, it analyzes the present situation of the serious sentencing imbalance in our country at the present stage and makes clear the importance and urgency of establishing the system of sentencing plot through the specific type of punishment. The author puts forward that the type of sentencing plot system should be established, and the significance of establishing the system of sentencing plot is put forward, and the most important thing is to set up a sentencing plot system. Then it puts forward specific ways to construct sentencing plot system.

【学位授予单位】：西南财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.13;D925.2

【参考文献】