论刑法中的“公共场所”

发布时间：2018-05-29 10:38

本文选题：公共场所 + 认定　；参考：《南京师范大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：刑法中的“公共场所”都是规范性构成要件要素,需要进行解释。司法实践和理论界对“公共场所”的争议可归纳为两个问题：刑法中的“公共场所”应当具有哪些特征?其特征是否具有相对性?本文先探寻各罪名所保护的法益,然后运用以罪刑法定、罪刑相适应为原则、以目的解释为核心的刑法解释方法诠释各罪名下公共场所的特征。“公共场所”之“公共”是对场所内人员的要求,其判断应当综合“现实的人数”、“人员数量的不特定性”以及“人员身份的不特定性”三方面的因素。“现实的多数人”是“公共”的核心,而“人员数量的不特定”和“人员身份的不特定”是对“现实人数不满足‘多数’但同样值得刑法作为‘公共’保护”的情形之必要补充。根据不同罪名保护法益不同,“公共场所”之“公共”具有相对性。“公共场所”之“场所”应当具有现实性,网络空间等不属于刑法中的“公共场所”。
[Abstract]:Public places in criminal law are all elements of normative elements, which need to be interpreted. The disputes in judicial practice and theory on "public places" can be summed up into two questions: what should be the characteristics of "public places" in criminal law? Is its characteristic relative? This article first explores the legal interests protected by each charge, then uses the principle of legality, the adaptation of crime and punishment, and interprets the characteristics of public places under each charge by means of the criminal law interpretation with the purpose as the core. The "public" of "public place" is the requirement of the personnel in the place, and its judgment should synthesize the three factors of "realistic number", "the number of personnel is not specific" and "the identity of the person is not specific". The "realistic majority" is at the heart of "public". "the number of persons is not specific" and "the identity of the personnel is not specific" is the necessary supplement to the situation that "the actual number of persons does not satisfy the 'majority' but is also worthy of criminal law as the 'public' protection". According to different laws of crime, the public of "public place" is relative. The "place" of "public place" should be realistic, and cyberspace is not a "public place" in criminal law.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D924

【相似文献】