法定犯违法性认识错误研究

发布时间：2018-05-09 16:40

本文选题：法定犯违法性认识错误 + 故意　；参考：《华东政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：储槐植教授说过，法定犯时代的到来要求我们必须加强对法定犯的理论研究。在法定犯的司法实践中客观地面临着一个多发的现象——法定犯违法性认识错误。关于违法性认识错误，当前的理论界主要是从广义的角度出发，，并没有着重的关注法定犯违法性认识错误。但是法定犯违法性认识错误应当有其自身独特的价值。本着提出问题、分析问题和解决问题的逻辑结构，本文的主体内容主要有三个章节，各部分具体内容如下：第一章即是提出问题。通过两个案例，说明法定犯违法性认识错误在当前我国司法实践中的处理情况。通过案例我们可以明显看出，当前我国司法实践对于违法性认识错误的处理存在明显的不合理性。接下来是对法定犯的内涵与外延进行了界定。因为欲研究法定犯违法性认识错误，必须首先确定研究对象的范围——法定犯的范围。法定犯的界定标准应当是双重违法性和较弱的道德违反性。随后，通过违法性认识基本理论的阐述得出了法定犯违法性认识错误的概念和分类，并对法定犯违法性认识错误当前国内外处理原则的变化进行了一个综述。第二章即是分析问题。本章是本文的重点，通过违法性认识错误、刑事责任和量刑的相关基本理论，对法定犯的违法性认识错误的定位进行了分析。本章内容共有三部分，第一部分笔者从违法性认识与故意的关系，分析了法定犯违法性认识错误的定罪定位，进而得出法定犯违法性认识错误不阻却故意的成立；第二部分以刑事责任承担的根据出发，对法定犯违法性认识错误减免刑事责任的当然性进行了分析；第三部分在前述两个部分研究的基础上，结合司法实践中量刑的考量因素，得出法定犯违法性认识错误在行为人承担刑事责任的前提下可以从轻、减轻或者免除处罚。第三章即是解决问题。本章的内容旨在解决我国刑事法治视野下，法定犯违法性认识错误在立法与司法中的应然选择。首先，通过我国刑事责任理论的分析，得出违法性认识错误可以单独地放在责任要素中考察。这样就解决了违法性认识错误“水土不服”的问题。其次，为司法实践中认定法定犯违法性认识错误提出了标准和方法，即坚持主客观相一致的原则，结合“普通人的标准”和“行为人的标准。”再次，通过为法定犯违法性认识错误减免刑事责任作出限制，进而提出不可避免的违法性认识错误可以免除刑事责任，而可以避免的违法性认识错误只可以减轻刑事责任。最后，经过对比国外立法体例和国内的法律草稿，得出可以在刑法总则的第五章“其他规定”中设置法定犯违法性认识错误减轻或免除刑事责任的相关条款。
[Abstract]:Professor Chu Huai-Zhi said that the coming of the era of statutory offense requires us to strengthen the theoretical study of statutory offense. In the judicial practice of legal offense, there is an objective phenomenon of illegal cognition. The current theoretical circle mainly starts from the broad sense, and does not pay attention to the illegal cognition error of the legal offense. However, the legal offense of illegality should have its own unique value. In line with the logical structure of problem raising, problem analysis and problem solving, the main body of this paper has three chapters, and the specific contents of each part are as follows: The first chapter is to ask questions. Through two cases, this paper explains how to deal with the illegal cognitive errors in the current judicial practice of our country. Through the case we can clearly see that there is obvious irrationality in the current judicial practice of our country to deal with illegitimate cognitive errors. Then it defines the connotation and extension of legal offense. Because in order to study the illegality of legal offense, we must first determine the scope of the object of study-the scope of statutory offense. The definition standard of statutory offense should be double illegality and weak moral violation. Then, through the elaboration of the basic theory of illegality cognition, the concept and classification of illegal cognitive errors of statutory crimes are obtained, and the changes of the current domestic and foreign treatment principles of illegal cognitive errors of statutory offenders are summarized. The second chapter is the analysis of the problem. This chapter is the focus of this paper, through the related basic theories of illegality, criminal responsibility and sentencing, the author analyzes the orientation of illegal cognitive errors of statutory offenders. There are three parts in this chapter. The first part of the author from the relationship between illegal understanding and intentional analysis of the legal illegal understanding of the position of conviction, and then came to the conclusion that the legal illegal understanding of the wrong unhindered but intentionally established; In the second part, based on the basis of criminal responsibility, the author analyzes the nature of criminal responsibility reduction and exemption from the legal illegality. The third part is based on the above two parts of the study, combined with the judicial practice of sentencing considerations, It is concluded that the legal offense of illegality can be mitigated or exempted from punishment under the premise of the criminal responsibility of the perpetrator. The third chapter is to solve the problem. The purpose of this chapter is to solve the problem of illegal cognition in legislation and judicature. First of all, through the analysis of the theory of criminal responsibility in our country, it is concluded that the mistakes of illegality can be investigated separately in the elements of responsibility. In this way, we have solved the problem of illegal cognition. Secondly, the author puts forward the standards and methods for recognizing the illegality in judicial practice, that is, adhering to the principle of consistent subjectivity and objectivity, combining "the standard of ordinary people" and "the standard of actor". Thirdly, by limiting the criminal responsibility for the illegal cognitive error of the legal offense, and then proposing that the unavoidable illegality cognitive error can avoid the criminal responsibility, the avoidable illegality cognitive error can only alleviate the criminal responsibility. Finally, by comparing the legislative style of foreign countries and the draft of domestic laws, it is concluded that we can set up the relevant provisions in Chapter V of the General principles of Criminal Law "other provisions" to reduce or exempt the criminal responsibility from the illegality of legal offenders.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D914

【参考文献】