从罪因多元论看传统罪责理论

发布时间：2018-05-12 22:08

本文选题：个人因素 + 被害人过错　；参考：《昆明理工大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：刑事古典学派认为,犯罪是由犯罪人自由意志的结果。然而,随着犯罪学的发展,人们逐渐认识到,犯罪是由多种原因共同造成的。意大利犯罪学家菲利认为,犯罪是由人类学因素、自然因素、社会因素等多种因素共同作用的结果。德国著名学者李斯特提出了“罪因二元论”。无论是菲利的“罪因三元论”,还是李斯特的“罪因二元论”,都无一例外地罗列了社会因素对犯罪发生的重要影响。然而,传统罪责理论在确定犯罪人的刑事责任时,很大程度上忽视了行为人以外的导致犯罪的原因。这样一种罪责理论有多方面的缺陷。首先,传统罪责理论偏重于犯罪人自身因素,将犯罪自身以外的因素基本排除在考虑之外,显得不周严。其次,传统罪责理论难以实现实质正义。传统罪责理论在确定行为人的罪责时,侧重行为人事由,很大程度上忽视了社会因素和被害人事由,必然难以确定犯罪人的实质罪责,最终会使刑罚偏离实质正义。最后,传统罪责理论不利于被害人警醒自己的过错,难以实现被害人预防。总之,传统罪责理论存在的诸多缺陷,需要以罪因多元为视角重新审视。当存在被人过错时,传统罪责理论应正视被害人过错对案件发生的影响力。学界对被害人过错影响刑事责任的机理提出了多种理论。梳理“值得保护”、“自我答责”及“比较过错”等理论,发现这些理论具有共通之处,即被害人与犯罪人对犯罪结果都有责任.且该责任具有可区分性；可分性还可通过侵权归责原理审视。考察传统民事侵权、刑事侵权的构成要件,可归纳出侵权责任的一般原理。运用侵权责任的一般原理,确定被害人与犯罪人的过错比例,并在考察被害人、犯罪人民事责任比例的基础之上,减免犯罪人的刑事责任。从而实现对犯罪人实质罪责的追问。当存在不可忽视的社会因素时,传统罪责理论考虑社会因素不仅存在必要性,也存在可行性。传统罪责理论应通过以下路径进行修正。将不可忽视的社会因素量化为单个元素,包含教育程度、经济状况、家庭背景及其他在行为人生活中发生的,且对行为人人格、价值观、人生观产生影响的诸多事件,并采取社会调查报告的方式,将社会因素的单个元素作为影响因子引入到裁判量刑程序中去,以法官自由裁量权界定社会因素与个人因素对犯罪发生的作用比值,进而实现社会因素对犯罪人罪责的分担,形成社会因素修正传统罪责理论的多进路模式。综合上述两种特殊情形,传统罪责理论可以作如下重新构造。一是同价犯罪人自身因素与社会因素对犯罪发生的影响力。即犯罪人自身因素与社会因素在罪责考量中具有等价作用。二是严格区分犯罪人类型,对病态犯罪人与激情犯罪人严格区分,尤其对病态犯罪人中的病理型病态犯罪人实行从宽量刑,对生理型病态犯罪人从严依法量刑,对激情犯罪人亦实施从宽量刑的方针。三是以二次量刑的模式考虑社会因素,从而实现实质罪责,进而实现实质正义。具体而言,先以社会调查报告为手段,引入社会因素的单个元素作为法官裁量的事实依据,确定社会因素与个人因素对犯罪发生的影响分量之比。然后,假定以纯正个人因素对犯罪发生的影响,造成了该社会危害性,并结合案件情节对行为人定罪与量刑。最后,依据前述比值与第一次量刑值对行为人罪责进行修正,从而实现社会因素对行为人刑事责任的分担。
[Abstract]:The criminal classical school believes that crime is the result of the free will of the criminal. However, with the development of criminology, people gradually realize that crime is caused by a variety of reasons. Italy criminologist Feeley believes that crime is the result of a variety of factors, such as anthropological factors, natural factors, social factors and other factors. The scholar Lester put forward "the dualism of the cause of sin". Whether it is Philip's "three yuan of sin" or "the dualism of the cause of sin", the important influence of social factors on the occurrence of crime is listed without exception. However, the traditional guilt theory largely ignores the perpetrator in determining the criminal responsibility of the criminal. The cause of the crime is the cause of the crime. There are many defects in this kind of crime theory. First, the traditional theory of guilt emphasizes the criminal's own factors, excluding the factors other than the crime itself from the consideration, it is not strict. Secondly, the traditional guilt theory is difficult to realize the substantial positive meaning. The traditional culpability theory is to determine the criminal responsibility of the perpetrator. With emphasis on the behavior and personnel, to a great extent, the social factors and the victims of the victims are largely ignored. It is inevitable that it is difficult to determine the substantive responsibility of the criminal, and ultimately makes the penalty deviate from the substantive justice. Finally, the traditional crime theory is not conducive to the victim to alert his own fault and to realize the prevention of the victims. In a word, there are many defects in the traditional crime theory. The crime needs to be reexamined from the perspective of pluralism.
When there is a person's fault, the traditional crime theory should face the influence of the victim's fault on the case. The academic circle has put forward many theories about the mechanism of the criminal responsibility of the victim's fault, and combs the theory of "worthy of protection", "self accountability" and "comparative fault", and finds that these theories have common points, that is, the victims and offenders. The sinner has the responsibility for the result of the crime. And the responsibility is distinguishable; the separability can also be examined by the principle of tort liability. The constitution of the traditional civil tort, the constituent elements of the criminal tort can be summed up, the general principle of the tort liability is summed up, and the general principle of the tort liability is used to determine the proportion of the victims and the offenders, and the investigation is made. On the basis of the ratio of crimes and crimes, the criminal responsibility of the offender is reduced and the criminal responsibility of the offender is examined.
When there is a social factor that can not be ignored, it is necessary and feasible to consider the social factors in traditional guilt theory. The traditional culpability theory should be amended by the following path. The social factors that can not be ignored are quantified as a single element, including education, economy, family background and others in the life of the perpetrator. There are many events which have influence on the personality, values and outlook on life of the actor, and adopt the social investigation report to introduce the individual elements of social factors into the referee's sentencing procedure, and determine the ratio of the social and human factors to the crime by the discretion of the judges, and then realize the society. The sharing of the guilt between the factors and the offenders forms a multi way way to amend the traditional theory of guilt by social factors.
Combining the above two special situations, the traditional crime theory can be restructured as follows. One is the influence of the individual factor and social factor on the crime of the same price criminal. That is, the offender's own factors and social factors have the equivalent effect in the consideration of the crime. The two is to strictly distinguish the type of the criminal, and to the sick and the passionate offender. Strictly distinguish, especially to the pathological and pathological morbid criminal among the sick offenders, to measure the punishment of the physiologically morbid criminal strictly according to law, and to carry out the principle of wide sentencing for the passionate criminals. Three is to consider the social factors by the mode of two sentencing, so as to realize the real quality of the crime, and then realize the substantive justice. The social investigation report, as a means, introduces a single element of social factors as the factual basis of a judge's discretion and determines the ratio of the social and personal factors to the crime. Then, it is assumed that the influence of pure personal factors on the occurrence of the crime has caused the social danger and the conviction and quantity of the perpetrator in the case of the case. Finally, according to the above ratio and the first sentencing value to amend the actor's guilt, we can achieve the social factor's sharing of the criminal responsibility of the actor.

【学位授予单位】：昆明理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D914

【参考文献】