抢夺罪与抢劫罪的界分——基于刑事本土资源的考察

发布时间：2018-05-03 18:41

本文选题：公然性 + 强制性　；参考：《法律适用》2017年17期

【摘要】：司法实践中,均为常发刑事案件的抢夺罪和抢劫罪,两罪虽只有一字之差,但二者的危害性相差很大,在疑难案件中其界分也颇为棘手。因此,有必要回归刑事本土化立场,注重实践理性。首先,以"公然性"的特征作为界分抢夺罪与抢劫罪的前提,发掘其中所蕴含的现实价值。其次,从被害人的角度,综合判断他人反抗是"不及"还是"不能",决定行为的强制性程度是否足以抑制他人反抗,从而界分抢夺罪和抢劫罪。由此,在现行刑法体系中,能够实现抢夺罪与抢劫罪间的罪刑均衡。更有利于构建既具有逻辑递进关系,又符合我国刑法立法和司法实践的罪刑体系,彰显刑法的谦抑性。
[Abstract]:In judicial practice, the crime of robbery and robbery are common criminal cases. Although the two crimes are different in one word, their harmfulness is quite different, and the division between them is quite difficult in difficult cases. Therefore, it is necessary to return to the position of criminal localization and pay attention to practical rationality. First of all, the characteristic of "overt" is taken as the premise of dividing the crime of robbery from the crime of robbery, and the practical value contained therein is explored. Secondly, from the victim's point of view, judging comprehensively whether the resistance of others is "inferior" or "cannot" determines whether the mandatory degree of behavior is sufficient to restrain the resistance of others, thus dividing the crime of robbery from the crime of robbery. Therefore, in the current criminal law system, the balance between the crime of robbery and the crime of robbery can be achieved. It is more conducive to the construction of both logical progressive relationship and criminal law legislation and judicial practice of China's criminal justice system, showing the modesty of criminal law.
【作者单位】：中国人民大学;
【基金】：2015年度中国法学会法学研究课题“非法经营罪定罪量刑实证研究”[CLS(2015)Y05]的阶段性成果 2015年度海南省创新科研课题“行政犯处罚的反思与限定”(Hys2015-32)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D924.3

【相似文献】