论刑法中危险犯的“危险”

发布时间：2018-05-28 21:16

本文选题：风险社会 + 危险　；参考：《华东政法大学》2014年博士论文

【摘要】：20世纪以来，随着科学技术的快速发展和全球化的急剧扩张，人类社会经历了一场根本性的变革。在这个变革过程中，产生了各种各样新型的“危险”。“危险”正成为现代社会的主要特征。为防范各种现代化的“危险”，立法者往往会选择以“危险犯”作为立法模式，提前发动刑罚权，堵截行为人的行为对法益造成的实害性结果。由于危险犯的立法模式是在行为尚未造成实害性结果的情况下，就对行为人进行处罚。因此如何理解刑法中危险犯的“危险”，划清“危险”的内涵和外延，决定了刑罚圈的大小，关系着刑法保护法益机能与人权保护机能之间的平衡。本文从风险社会背景下的社会“危险”着手，通过探寻“危险”的本质，界定“危险”概念；明确具体危险犯与抽象危险犯的分类标准，划清刑法中具体危险犯与实害犯，抽象危险犯与行为犯之间的界限；尝试建立起具体危险的判断方法和抽象危险范围限缩方式的理论框架。除引言外，本文共分为五章。第一章在论述风险社会背景下特殊“危险”的特征与表现的基础上，探究刑法在面对现代化危险时的应对之道。广义上的危险，除了指代来自外界的，不为人行为所决定的外来因素的冲击外，同样也可以包括现代化社会中基于人类行为选择或制度缺陷所产生的各类危机。但是为了说明现代化社会中取决于人的行为所产生的各类危险与传统社会中主要来源于外界的危险的特殊性，社会学界对现代化社会中基于人类行为和选择产生的各类危险使用“风险”一词予以概况，以示与传统社会中危险的区别。现代化社会中的危险是社会现代化的产物，社会现代化的“阴暗面”导致了现代社会危险的产生。现代化社会中的危险具有不确定性、复杂性、扩散性和“二重性”等特征。现代化社会的危险是人造危险，其破坏力巨大，具有不确定性、平等性和全球性。现代化社会的危险是制度危险，是资本主义制度的制度危机，其主要表现为制度的冲突和制度的缺失两个方面。现代化社会的危险是科技理性异化的危险。科技的发展偏离了科技服务于人的目的，成为了社会风险的源头。科技理性的异化首先源于科技系统的失败；其次科技理性的异化是因为科技发展脱离了社会理性的规制；科学理性的异化更本质的原因是在于人类社会对于科学技术滥用。我国现在正处于具有中国特色的“风险社会”之中。其危险主要表现为：经济发展不平衡导致的风险；制度缺陷导致的风险；环境恶化导致的风险；经济全球化带来的风险等。在加大对各类现代社会新型危险治理力度的呼声下衍生出来的“风险刑法”理论近些年来在刑法学界引起了广泛的关注和讨论。我国刑法学界对“风险”的理解有泛化的倾向。如果将“风险”做过于泛化理解，不但“风险刑法”理论中反思现代性的特定价值将荡然无存，所谓的“风险刑法”也会变成一个无所不包的大口袋。风险社会对刑法的挑战主要表现为对传统刑法上的法益概念的冲击和对传统刑法归责理论的冲击两个方面。所谓风险刑法是一种将刑法功能化的立法趋势，扩大危险犯范围，以及将新型犯罪入罪等一系列在风险社会下的刑法发展现象进行类型化研究。风险刑法对传统刑法理论发展主要表现为法益概念的抽象化和扩大化以及罪责的功能化与客观化。风险刑法理论与传统刑法理论存在矛盾和冲突表现为：由于法益概念的抽象化与扩大化，容易造成刑法处罚的扩大化；罪责理论的功能化与客观化，导致罪责范围的扩张。因此风险刑法的理论扩张必须在一定的限度内进行，以实现风险刑法与传统刑法之间的协调。风险刑法理论是传统刑法的补充；风险刑法理论也应受刑法基本原则的制约；风险刑法应当坚持罪责原则；风险刑法理论应当遵循比例原则。第二章在探讨危险犯的立法依据的基础上，探究危险犯中“危险”的本质。危险犯设立的理论基础在于，危险犯的设立是刑法对于社会现代化“危险”的必然应对，是法益保护早期化的必然要求。危险犯的设立是基于风险社会中的刑事政策的必然选择，有助于刑法一般预防功能的发挥。危险犯的设立弥补了未遂责任追究的障碍与漏洞，是对行为人不法意志的完全评价，具有预防犯罪的功效，解决了某些犯罪的实害结果认定困难的问题。从刑法的历史来看，“实害”的概念出现远远早于“危险”的概念。关于危险犯中危险本质的的源头可以追溯到现代刑法理论中有关古典学派客观主义和近代学派主观主义的争论中。主观危险说与客观危险说之间的争论其基本点在于对危险究竟是一种“判断”还是一种“状态”。所谓危险是指有法益侵害可能性的一种被判断的状态。在我国刑法中，对危险本质的传统看法具有明显的主观危险说的倾向，不甚合理。危险本质的而言，具体的危险说的看法更具有说服力。具体危险说符合我国现行刑法对犯罪的构造方式；具体的危险说在危险判断上强调标准的“客观性”，限制了危险存在的范围，防止刑罚的随意发动，有利于人权的保护,实现刑法的保护机能和保障机能的协调发挥；同时具体危险说的判断具有坚实的社会基础。第三章在界定危险犯的概念的基础上，以“危险”性质不同作为标准，将危险犯划分为具体危险犯和抽象危险犯两类。危险犯这一概念来源于大陆法系刑法理论，我国学者往往从处罚依据、犯罪成立、犯罪既遂，三个不同的立足点定义危险犯。首先应当排除从处罚依据的角度对危险犯的定义。以犯罪既遂的角度和犯罪成立的角度对于危险犯的定义并无实质的冲突，，但并不全面。要科学、全面的定义危险犯，揭示出危险犯概念的本质，必须从危险的根本性质着手。在危险犯这一概念统摄下的具体危险犯与抽象危险犯的“危险”所反映的结果无价值与行为无价值的理论侧重点各有不同，因此，以统一的概念描述危险犯的整体，无论侧重于结果无价值还是行为无价值都会有失偏颇。危险犯是指以发生一定法益侵害之危险或者由实行行为符合构成要件中所预定之抽象危险发生即构成犯罪既遂的犯罪。从处罚根据的角度出发，危险犯与未遂犯之间并没有本质的区别，从刑事立法规范性出发，危险犯的“危险”是被立法者挑选出来的，需要特别保护法益的危险。经过分则的设定，危险犯成为了既遂犯的一种类型，与未遂犯之间具有了本质的区别。具体危险犯的危险与实害犯的实害结果一样，都是犯罪结果的表现方式之一，具体危险犯属于结果犯。抽象危险犯是行为犯的一个下位概念，行为犯包括抽象危险犯和其他行为犯两类。危险犯与其相应的实害犯之间是基础犯与结果加重犯的关系。依据危险的性质不同，危险犯可以分为具体危险犯和抽象危险犯两类。抽象危险犯的危险侧重于行为无价值的考量，主要强调的是行为的危险性，而具体危险犯的危险则强调法益陷于危险境地的现实状态，反映了结果无价值的思想。第四章在论述具体危险犯的概念、构造的基础上，着力于对具体危险判断理论体系的构建。具体危险犯是指行为人的行为是否具有足以造成某种后果的危险,需要根据具体案情加以判断的犯罪。刑法中的具体危险犯应当限定在对社会公共法益具有重大侵害性的犯罪和侵犯复杂客体的犯罪之中。在具体危险犯的客观构成要件中，构成要件要素除了个案中的“危险结果”外，还必须具有“危险行为”，以及“危险行为”与“危险结果”之间具有因果关系。具体的危险犯要求行为人针对行为客体实施了“制造法所不容许的风险”的行为；制造了一种相当的，不被容许的，侵害风险意义上的，具体结果的危险；并且应当就该行为和结果之间的因果关系是否存在作出具体的考量与判断。具体危险犯以存在危险的故意作为基础。对于危险意味着紧迫的实害结果发生的具体危险犯而言，危险故意往往与实害的故意相等同。对于危险只是对于实害结果发生具有指示性作用，危险的发生与实害结果之间的关系不具有紧密连接性的具体危险犯而言，其主观心态是对危险的直接故意与对实害结果认识的结合；对于危险的发生与实害结果的发生相距较远的具体危险犯来说，主观心态是危险故意与实害过失的结合。具体危险的从本质上来说，是人类以一定客观事实为基础所做出的一种判断。在具体危险的判断方面，可以采用两阶段的判断方式。第一阶段是“实害发生可能性的判断”。在这个阶段，是以事后判断的观点，考虑所有的事实，确认在具体个案中，对于刑法保护的法益有无产生实害的可能性。亦即考虑所有裁判时可以知道的事实，认为在通常情况下，此行为启动的因果关系链条是否会导致法益的实害。第二阶段进行“实害不发生的偶然性判断”。在此阶段一样是以事后判断的观点，考虑导致实害不发生的原因是否属于偶然。第五章在论述抽象危险犯的概念、构造的基础上，讨论对抽象危险范围的限缩方法。所谓抽象危险犯是指以实行行为符合构成要件中所预定的抽象危险就成立犯罪既遂的犯罪。以行为无价值的观点来看，抽象危险犯只是单纯的要求行为人为特定的行为，无需要求任何实际的危险结果就可以构成犯罪。抽象危险犯虽然看似与刑法法益保护的要求不符，但其本质上仍是以法益的侵害作为其立法的指导，符合社会防卫的需要，有利于民众形成对于规范的认同感的刑事立法。站在刑法应该保护法益的立场，应当将所谓的抽象危险理解成为一般的危险较为妥当。抽象危险犯以行为的应受处罚性为基础，其行为要素包含了数个一般性构成要素的简略的表述。这些要素都经过了立法者的选择与抽象，把过去发生过损害的经验，由复杂、混乱的事态转换成一致的、清晰的、确定的足以指出行为危险性的“表征”。抽象危险犯在主观上要求行为人对于构成要件所设定的类型化的行为具有故意。危险驾驶罪是故意犯罪，其罪过内容是行为人对危险驾驶行为具有故意。而其对于实害性结果既可以是故意也可以是过失。抽象危险中的“抽象”一词是对于危险的一种形式性设定。这种“形式”要求意味着抽象危险犯的危险范围在犯罪构成设定的范围内具有一定的普遍性和一般性。这是行为无价值的要求。但是，这种一般性和普遍性并非绝对的，需要运用结果无价值的观点对其适用范围进行一定的限制。如果在个案中确实能够排除类型化、一般化的侵害行为具体危险性的存在，则应当将在特定情况下的行为排除在抽象危险犯的处罚范围之外，认为抽象的危险并未发生。
[Abstract]:Since the 20th century , with the rapid development of science and technology and the rapid expansion of globalization , the human society has undergone a radical change . In this process , the human society has experienced a variety of " dangerous " . In order to guard against the " dangerous " of the modern society , the legislators often choose to use " dangerous criminals " as the legislative mode . In order to guard against the " dangerous " of all kinds of modernization , the legislators often choose to use " dangerous criminals " as the legislative mode .

This paper starts with the social " danger " in the background of risk society , and defines the concept of " danger " by exploring the essence of " danger " ;
Make clear the classification standard of specific dangerous criminals and abstract dangerous criminals , and clear the limit between the specific dangerous criminals and the real criminals in the criminal law , abstract the dangerous criminals and the perpetrators ;
In addition to the introduction , this paper is divided into five chapters .

In order to illustrate the danger of modern society as the product of social modernization , the danger of modern society is the danger of modern society . The danger of modern society is the danger of scientific and technological rationality . The development of modern society is the source of social risk .
Second , the alienation of scientific and technological rationality is because the development of science and technology is separated from the regulation of social rationality ;
The reason for the alienation of scientific rationality lies in the misuse of science and technology by the human society . China is now in the " risk society " with Chinese characteristics . Its danger lies mainly in the risks caused by the imbalance of economic development ;
Risks due to system defects ;
Risks due to environmental degradation ;
Risks caused by economic globalization , etc .

In recent years , the theory of " risk criminal law " has caused extensive attention and discussion in the field of criminal law .
The function and objectification of the theory of criminal responsibility leads to the expansion of the scope of responsibility . Therefore , the theoretical expansion of the risk criminal law must be carried out within a certain limit , so as to realize the coordination between the risk criminal law and the traditional criminal law . The theory of risk criminal law is the supplement of the traditional criminal law ;
The theory of risk criminal law should also be restricted by the basic principles of criminal law ;
The risk criminal law should adhere to the principle of criminal responsibility ;
The theory of risk criminal law should follow the principle of proportionality .

The second chapter explores the essence of " danger " in dangerous criminals based on the discussion of the legislative basis of dangerous criminals . The theoretical basis of the establishment of dangerous criminals is that the establishment of dangerous criminals is the inevitable requirement of the criminal policy in the social modernization .

From the history of criminal law , the concept of " real damage " appears far from the concept of " danger " . The source of the dangerous nature of dangerous criminals can be traced back to the debate between the classical school objectivism and the modern school subjectivism in the theory of modern criminal law .
It is dangerous to say that the " objectivity " of the standard is emphasized in the dangerous judgment , limits the scope of the existence of danger , prevents the arbitrary launching of the penalty , is beneficial to the protection of human rights , and realizes the coordination of the protection function and guarantee function of the criminal law ;
At the same time , the judgment of specific danger has a solid social foundation .

On the basis of defining the concept of dangerous criminals , the definition of dangerous criminals is divided into two categories : dangerous criminals and abstract dangerous criminals .

According to the nature of the danger , the dangerous criminals can be divided into two categories : the specific dangerous criminals and the abstract dangerous criminals . The danger of the abstract dangerous criminals focuses on the consideration of the value of the behavior , mainly emphasizes the danger of the behavior , and the danger of the specific dangerous criminals emphasizes the realistic state of the law benefit to the dangerous situation , and reflects the unworthiness thought of the result .

The fourth chapter is based on the concept and construction of the specific dangerous crime , and is focused on the construction of the theory system of the specific danger . The specific dangerous crime is the crime of whether the behavior of the perpetrator has enough to cause some consequence . The specific dangerous crime in the criminal law should be limited to the crime of the crime and the violation of the complex object according to the specific case .
To create a comparable , not permitted , risk - threatening , specific outcome ;
In the case of dangerous criminals , the dangerous intention is often the same as that of the actual harm . For the specific dangerous criminals whose relationship does not have a close connection between the occurrence of danger and the result of real damage , the subjective attitude is the combination of the direct intention of danger and the recognition of the result of real harm .
The subjective attitude is the combination of dangerous and intentional negligence for the specific dangerous criminals which are far away from the occurrence of danger .

The first stage is the judgment of the possibility of real harm . In this stage , it is considered that whether the chain of causation of the protection of the criminal law can lead to the real harm of the law . In this stage , it is believed that in the general case , whether the chain of causation of the initiation of the act can lead to the real harm of the law .

In the fifth chapter , the author discusses the concept and construction of abstract dangerous criminals and discusses the method of limiting the scope of abstract danger .

Abstract : The term " abstract " in the abstract danger is a formal setting for the danger . This " form " requirement means that the dangerous scope of abstract dangerous criminals has certain universality and generality in the scope of the constitution of the crime .
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924

【参考文献】