论徇私舞弊型渎职犯罪之认定

发布时间：2018-05-23 12:40

本文选题：徇私舞弊 + 渎职犯罪　；参考：《山东大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：徇私舞弊型渎职犯罪之认定的疑难问题比较多,核心问题是诉讼可证性差。究其原因,一是“徇私舞弊”作为法律概念,其涵义和性质模糊不清；二是“徇私舞弊”作为构成要件,对其法律地位缺乏明确的判断及认定。尤其对“徇私舞弊”性质的界定争议颇大,在徇私舞弊是否属于定罪的构成要件要素,以及若属于构成要件要素时是主观方面的构成要件要素还是客观方面的构成要件要素等方面都没有达成一致。笔者在文中对不同观点一一作了阐述,同时结合自身从事渎职犯罪侦查工作的司法实际,从有利于司法适用的角度提出了自己的观点,并且重点就如何解决此类犯罪的现实司法困境作了详细论述。本文分为三大部分。第一部分提出了徇私舞弊型渎职犯罪诉讼可证性差的难题,分析了查办徇私舞弊型渎职犯罪的现实困境,并总结了造成这一困境的原因,有针对性地提出了问题解决的路径选择。第二部分论证了解决徇私舞弊型渎职犯罪诉讼可证性差这一问题的具体方法,即三个认定原则：行为人明知原则、犯罪故意行为化原则以及客观事实认定原则。笔者结合具体案例,分别从刑法解释学、犯罪构成理论、行为理论、证据法学的角度对理论界和实务界关于徇私舞弊含义及性质的不同理解和认识进行列举分析,最终提出了徇私舞弊应当属于犯罪客观方面及主观方面的构成要件要素的观点。第三部分为全面解决司法实践中徇私舞弊型渎职犯罪诉讼可证性差的的问题,提出了认定原则的适用例外及理论补充,主要针对此类犯罪涉及到受贿犯罪及其他犯罪的情况时,具体应当采用的罪数认定以及处断原则。
[Abstract]:There are many difficult problems in the identification of malfeasance for favoritism. The reason is that "favoritism and malpractice" is a legal concept, the meaning and nature of which is ambiguous, and "favoritism and malpractice" as a constituent element lacks a clear judgment and determination of its legal status. In particular, the definition of the nature of "favoritism and malpractice" is quite controversial. Whether favoritism is a constituent element of a conviction, There is no agreement on whether the elements are subjective elements or objective elements. At the same time, combining with the judicial practice of the investigation of malfeasance, the author puts forward his own viewpoint from the point of view of judicial application. And focus on how to solve the practical judicial dilemma of such crimes made a detailed discussion. This paper is divided into three parts. The first part puts forward the difficult problem that the lawsuit of malfeasance for favoritism and malfeasance is poor, analyzes the practical predicament of investigating the crime of malfeasance for favoritism, and sums up the reasons for this dilemma. The path choice of problem solving is put forward. The second part demonstrates the solution to the problem of malfeasance of favoritism and malfeasance, namely three principles: the principle of knowing the perpetrator, the principle of intentional crime and the principle of objective fact. Combining with specific cases, the author enumerates and analyzes the different understanding and understanding of the meaning and nature of favoritism in theory and practice from the angle of criminal hermeneutics, criminal constitution theory, behavior theory and evidence law. Finally, the author points out that favoritism and malpractice should belong to the elements of objective and subjective aspects of the crime. The third part is to solve the problem of poor proof of malfeasance for favoritism and malfeasance in judicial practice, and puts forward the application exception and theoretical supplement of the principle of cognizance, which is mainly aimed at the situation that this kind of crime involves bribery and other crimes. The specific number of crimes should be determined and the principle of adjudication.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D924.3

【相似文献】