刑法中的先行行为研究
发布时间:2018-05-10 15:29
本文选题:先行行为 + 法理依据 ; 参考:《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文
【摘要】:先行行为作为引起不纯正不作为犯罪作为义务的来源,自十九世纪起便得到了刑法理论和司法判例的肯定。虽然历经一百余年的发展,先行行为理论仍然存在法理依据不足、内涵模糊不清、判断标准不明等问题,导致司法实践对作为义务的认定语焉不详。正是理论研究的裹足不前,使先行行为遭致了批判。对先行行为理论进行深入研究,不仅能为先行行为正名,还有助于确定先行行为的内涵与外延并为司法实践提供可操作的判断标准。 本文除引言与结语外共分为四个部分: 第一部分:从先行行为的发展谱系出发,对先行行为理论的发展历史作了简要梳理,肯定其作为形式义务来源的历史地位。同时,对先行行为理论发展过程中的争议做出回应,肯定先行行为存在合理的法理依据和必要性。 第二部分:在对现有先行行为法理依据的分析基础上,通过对引起刑事义务的实质标准进行分析并结合支配理论,提出先行行为是一种上升为刑事法律评价的严重破坏伦理观念的行为,,其背后的法理便在于伦理观念所蕴含的对国民安全感的保障,期待并信赖引起危险者在具有某种支配力时应阻止危险的实现,对此种期待与信赖的违背乃严重破坏伦理观念之行为。 第三部分:本文所谓之先行行为作为能够引起刑事作为义务的特定前行为,是一种刑事法律根据前行为与危险状态的关系以及行为人事后所处之具体客观环境而进行的法律拟制。先行行为在内涵上具有致因性、法律性、相当性与支配性四方面的本质属性。先行行为的外延在规范评价上包括部分合法行为、违法行为和犯罪行为,在主观心态上包括部分无意识的行为,在实施方式上仅限于作为。先行行为内涵与外延的厘清,也为其判断提供了标准。 第四部分:理论的研究应归根于实践的适用。本文在对先行行为进行简要归类的基础上结合先行行为判断标准对相关典型案例作了深入分析,以期为先行行为的司法适用确立样本。
[Abstract]:The antecedent act, as the source of the obligation to cause the crime of impure omission, has been affirmed by the theory of criminal law and judicial precedent since the nineteenth century. Although after more than one hundred years of development, there are still some problems in the theory of antecedent behavior, such as lack of legal basis, vague connotation and unclear standard of judgment, which lead to the ambiguity of judicial practice in the determination of duty of action. It is the lack of progress in theoretical research that makes the antecedents subject to criticism. Further study on the theory of antecedent behavior can not only correct the name of antecedent act, but also help to determine the connotation and extension of antecedent act and provide an operational criterion for judicial practice. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into four parts: The first part: starting from the development pedigree of antecedent behavior, this paper briefly combs the development history of antecedent behavior theory and affirms its historical position as the source of formal obligation. At the same time, the author responds to the controversy in the development of antecedent behavior theory, and affirms that there is reasonable legal basis and necessity for antecedent behavior. The second part: on the basis of the analysis of the legal basis of the existing antecedents, through the analysis of the essential standards that give rise to the criminal obligation and the combination of the dominating theory, It is pointed out that antecedent behavior is a kind of behavior that seriously destroys the ethical concept which is raised to the criminal legal evaluation. The legal principle behind it lies in the guarantee of the national security contained in the ethical concept. To expect and trust the person who causes danger should prevent the realization of danger when he has a certain power, and the violation of such expectation and trust is a serious violation of ethical concept. The third part: the so-called antecedent act in this paper can give rise to the obligation of criminal act. It is a kind of legal fiction based on the relationship between the former act and the dangerous state and the concrete objective environment in which the perpetrator is afterwards. Antecedent behavior has four essential attributes: causative, legal, equivalent and dominant. The extension of antecedents includes some legal acts, illegal acts and criminal acts in the normative evaluation, some unconscious acts in the subjective state of mind, and only acts in the way of implementation. The clarification of the connotation and extension of antecedent behavior also provides the standard for its judgment. The fourth part: the research of theory should be rooted in the application of practice. Based on a brief classification of antecedents, this paper makes a thorough analysis of some typical cases in order to establish a sample for the judicial application of antecedents combined with the judgment criteria of antecedents.
【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】:D914
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 刘士心;;不纯正不作为犯罪中先行行为引起的义务研究[J];北方法学;2007年06期
2 李晓龙,李成;不纯正不作为犯作为义务来源研究[J];北京市政法管理干部学院学报;1999年02期
3 曹盛;郭理蓉;;先行行为的定位、范围及立法之探讨[J];法学杂志;2010年08期
4 何荣功;;不真正不作为犯的构造与等价值的判断[J];法学评论;2010年01期
5 王志强;许相明;;不作为犯罪中的先行行为[J];法制与经济(下半月);2007年10期
6 谢绍华;;先行行为不作为犯与结果加重犯的区别与认定[J];北京政法职业学院学报;2013年01期
7 王莹;;论犯罪行为人的先行行为保证人地位[J];法学家;2013年02期
8 常凤香,胡剑;交通肇事罪逃逸问题研究[J];河南公安高等专科学校学报;2005年03期
9 朱祯学;;特定道德义务应是不作为犯罪的作为义务来源[J];河南公安高等专科学校学报;2007年03期
10 于改之;也论先行行为的范围[J];湖南省政法管理干部学院学报;2001年05期
本文编号:1869860
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/1869860.html