不作为犯罪之先行行为问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-17 11:08

本文选题：不作为犯罪 + 先行行为　；参考：《郑州大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：先行行为理论对于我们探究不作为犯罪问题有着积极的影响,就该理论而言,虽然其获得了我国法律界人士的普遍认可,但是,对于先行行为的探讨还处于理论层面,我国法律并未对其做出明文规定,这致使先行行为研究很难有一个统一的标准,为先行行为研究造成了重大困扰。所以,对先行行为进行系统的探究,不仅是完善我国法律机制的需要,此外更是解决现实法律问题的需要。在该论文中,笔者首先针对该理论的前提进行了阐述,认为其经过了从形式义务理论学说向实质义务理论学说的转变。其次笔者再次进行探讨,对产生不作为犯罪作为义务的根据,进行了详细阐述,学术界主要有肯定与否定之争,当然笔者认同肯定说更为合理。持肯定说的学者认为,先行行为是不作为犯罪的一项重要义务来源。接着对该理论的界定和范围进行了论述,主要参考了罗克辛教授的观点对先行行为进行界定,认为先行行为成立包括以下三个条件:其是风险出现或升高行为、风险之间存在联系、其他客观的阻断规则。下面笔者对先行行为的范围进行详细讨论,笔者认为先行行为必须是一种违法行为,防卫过当和紧急避险只是特殊情况;其可以是犯罪行为;其并不限于自己的行为;其只局限于作为犯罪,不作为犯罪不能够构成先行行为;无责行为和有责行为都是可以成为先行行为的。在文章的最后一章笔者论述了:由先行行为所引发的不作为犯罪的立法问题,根据我国自身情况,最合理的方式是采取刑法总则单列式模式,意思是说,在刑法总则上增加不作为犯罪和作为义务的来源问题,然后再详细地阐释先行行为等义务的来源问题。需要注意的是,相关法律条款还应该对先行行为的组成要素及适用范围等给予明确说明,以便我们能够秉持着一个具体的标准来判定不纯正不作为犯罪活动,从而更好地解决现实中的法律问题。
[Abstract]:The theory of antecedent behavior has a positive influence on us to explore the crime of omission. As far as this theory is concerned, although it has been generally accepted by the legal profession of our country, the discussion of antecedent behavior is still at the theoretical level. It is difficult to establish a unified standard for the study of antecedents, which has caused great trouble for the study of antecedents. Therefore, it is not only the need to perfect the legal mechanism of our country, but also the need to solve the practical legal problems. In this paper, the author first expounds the premise of the theory and thinks that it has changed from the theory of formal obligation to the theory of substantive obligation. Secondly, the author discusses again, to produce the crime of omission as the basis of the obligation, the academic community mainly has a positive and negative debate, of course, the author agrees that the affirmation is more reasonable. The affirmative scholars believe that antecedent behavior is an important obligation source of omission crime. Then it discusses the definition and scope of this theory, mainly referring to Professor Roxim's view to define antecedent behavior, and holds that the establishment of antecedent behavior includes the following three conditions: it is the occurrence or elevation of risk. There is a link between risk and other objective blocking rules. The author discusses the scope of antecedent behavior in detail. The author thinks that antecedent behavior must be a kind of illegal act, that it is only a special case, that it can be a criminal act, that it is not limited to its own behavior, and that it is not limited to its own behavior. It is limited to act as a crime, not to act as a crime can not constitute a leading act; no responsibility act and responsible behavior can become the leading act. In the last chapter of the article, the author discusses the legislative problem of omission crime caused by the antecedent act. According to our own situation, the most reasonable way is to adopt the single formula model of the general principles of criminal law, which means to say, In the general principle of criminal law, the problem of the source of omission and obligation is added, and then the origin of obligation such as antecedent act is explained in detail. It should be noted that the relevant legal provisions should also provide a clear description of the constituent elements and the scope of application of the advance act, so that we can uphold a specific criterion to determine the criminal activity of non-pure omission. In order to better solve the legal problems in reality.
【学位授予单位】：郑州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D914

【相似文献】