刑法中组织、领导行为研究

发布时间：2018-06-30 22:14

本文选题：组织犯 + 组织行为　；参考：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：通观各国刑法规定，无论是否承认组织犯的特殊共犯地位，组织、领导行为都被附条件入罪评价。我国大陆刑法以作用为主兼顾分工的标准划分共犯人类型，影响共同犯罪的组织、领导行为被刑法理论统称为组织犯，组织犯明显区别于其他共犯类型，具有主犯的地位。加之刑法另设罪名将若干组织、领导行为实行行为化。两种立法选择都要求规范刑法理论准确解释组织、领导行为涵义，清晰组织、领导行为的刑法本质和特定内在结构。它同时对刑事政策理论提出了以下问题：何以一些组织、领导行为被独立成罪，另一些组织、领导行为何以连同其他关联犯罪被并罚？为此，笔者根据现行刑法相关规定和刑事政策精神，归纳总结组织、领导行为概念和本质，力图解答上述理论与实践课题。全文共分为五个部分，共29643字。第一部分，简要介绍我国大陆刑法中组织、领导行为概念及其性质。首先，借助刑法相关规定和相关研究成果，在总结复杂共同犯罪行为共性基础上，区分和界定组织犯概念。所谓组织犯，统指基于共同犯罪目的，建立行为共同体，，指挥、协调共犯人活动的人。其次，由组织犯定义扩大到刑法中组织、领导行为的概念。由于组织犯是我国刑法总则规定的，由此有必要进入刑法分则，通过特定具体罪状进一步梳理其他组织、领导行为形式。对组织行为的理解大可从生活意义及刑法意义两个角度进行区分把握：所谓生活意义上的组织行为，即是指行为人基于特定的行为目的，采取诸如招揽、引诱、拉拢等行为手段将分散的人或事物简单聚集的行为；所谓刑法意义上的组织行为则指，特定犯罪人围绕一定犯罪目的而采取的诸如发起、策划、建立等行为手段，旨在成就具备相当程度犯罪集合的行为。而领导行为并不存在刑法总（分）则归纳的差异，所以领导行为可被定义为，特定主体依据其自身特殊地位，为促使犯罪目的的实现而采取的左右犯罪过程的行为。再次，对刑法中组织、领导行为类型进行简要介绍。组织、领导行为存在形式的复杂及存在状态的多变，使其在我国大陆刑法中的行为类型或者说定位并未趋于同一。第二部分，探讨组织、领导行为独立成罪的根据及类型。首先，明确立法就组织类犯罪的规范情况。近年来，立法不断通过修正案的方式丰富我国大陆刑法分则就组织类犯罪的规定，内容范围囊括了罪名上以组织特定行为为模式的犯罪、聚众犯罪中由负责组织、指挥作用的首要分子构成的犯罪以及虽然罪名上没有体现组织性，但在具体实行行为过程中包括“组织”类型的犯罪。其中，仅以组织特定行为为模式的犯罪就涉及到我国大陆刑法分则中14个相关罪名，如：组织卖淫罪、组织出卖人体器官罪、组织他人偷越国（边）境罪、组织残疾人、儿童乞讨罪等。其次，就组织、领导传销活动的行为、组织残疾人、儿童乞讨的行为、组织未成年人进行违反治安管理活动的行为进行分别论述。再次，阐释单列组织、领导行为独立成罪的根据，明确区分该类情形下行为与传统模式的区别。在深刻把握行为个性的同时，一定程度上体察立法精神或者说刑事法政策的转变。第三部分，剖析共同犯罪中组织、领导行为之竞合现象。所谓的行为竞合，实则意指那些在共同犯罪情形下，就行为手段或者行为效能与组织、领导行为极相近似的行为。首先，区分组织、领导行为与教唆行为。教唆行为因具有促使被教唆人产生或强化犯意的功能价值，就后者而言，与组织、领导行为有一定的功能重叠。再者说，在就组织犯尚未形成系统认知之前，组织犯惯常被纳入教唆犯范畴加以处理，两者间有极深的渊源，准确区分组织、领导行为与教唆行为，便于把握共同犯罪情形下主体身份的认知。其次，区分组织、领导行为与实行行为。实行行为统指被规范纳入犯罪构成要件评价的行为。按照刑法总则就组织犯的规范精神，复杂共同犯罪情形下组织、领导行为无论就行为的性质或是存在形式与具体实行行为都有明显差异，但这并不影响两种行为在成就特定犯罪目的上的效能竞合。此处将组织、领导行为与实行行为单列对比，更加清晰了复杂共同犯罪情形中组织、领导行为存在的独立价值，同时明确了实行犯的责任。第四部分，明晰接受双罚组织、领导行为的存在及追责正当性。组织、领导黑社会性质组织的行为与组织、领导恐怖组织的行为是我国刑法分则规范中少有的接受双罚的行为类别，行为人不仅要为犯罪组织形态买单，还要为组织成员基于组织利益实施的具体犯罪买单。文章观点区别于部分学者的主张，认为依据主客观相一致的追责标准加之对我国刑事政策的辅助考察，立法就上述情形下行为主体作出两次评价的出发点并无不当，具体的追责过程并不存在绝对意义上的重复评价。但为了在责任承担上体现对受罪主体的实质公平，或许我们可以将组织、领导行为独立评价的刑量上线刻意降低。第五部分，甄别刑法中组织、领导行为的形态。任何被刑法评价的行为，其自身在时间维度上都体现了一定的纵向过程。过程本身因承载着随时面临来自主客观因素影响的风险，所以并非着手实施犯罪即达到既遂程度。组织、领导行为因其存在状态及作用延伸较一般实行行为都更为复杂，所以对其未完成形态的把握既要关注不同形态下行为本身是否切实终止，又要考量行为作用是否存在后续延伸。在此以特殊类型、共同犯罪、双重处罚类型为区分梳理基础，分别阐述各情形下对组织、领导行为未完成形态的把握。首先，因为特殊类型被限定为被组织行为不构成犯罪而组织行为被作为实行行为予以规范，此类组织行为的成就标准并不及犯罪集团复杂，所以对其未完成形态的区分我们只需严格把握立法规定的相关标准即可。其次，因为共同犯罪在组织、领导行为的作用下已形成了相当规模，组织程度较高，所以对其中组织、领导行为未完成形态的区分就要在把握行为终止的同时考量行为作用对具体实行行为是否存在后续延伸。最后，接受双罚的组织、领导行为。虽然组织、领导黑社会性质组织的行为与组织、领导恐怖组织的行为皆为接受双罚的行为类型，但两者的形态区分状况却不尽相同。结合我国刑法第22、23、24、294条之立法规范，组织、领导黑社会性质组织的行为一般情形下并不存在形态区分可能。而组织、领导恐怖组织的行为，因该罪被立法明确为行为犯，行为过程本身自然就有形态区分的空间及刑法意义。
[Abstract]:The criminal law of various countries stipulates that no matter whether or not the special accomplice status, organization and leadership of the organization are admitted to the crime evaluation, the criminal law of the mainland of China divides the types of common offenders into the standard of division of labor and affects the organization of the common crime, and the behavior of the leadership is called the organization offender, and the organizational offender is distincently different from the criminal law. The two kinds of legislative choices all require the standard of the criminal law theory to explain the correct interpretation of the organization, the meaning of the leadership, the clear organization, the nature of the criminal law and the specific internal structure of the leading behavior. Question: Why are some organizations, leadership behavior being independently committed, and how other organizations and leading acts are punished with other related crimes? To this end, the author summarizes the concept and essence of leadership behavior in accordance with the relevant provisions of the current criminal law and the spirit of criminal policy, and tries to answer the above theoretical and practical topics.
The full text is divided into five parts, with a total of 29643 words.
The first part is a brief introduction to the concept and nature of the organization and leadership in the criminal law of the mainland of China. First, with the help of the relevant provisions of the criminal law and the relevant research results, the concept of organizational crime is distinguished and defined on the basis of the generality of the complex and common crime. The so-called organizational offender, based on the purpose of the common crime, establishes a community of behavior, command and coordination. Second, the concept of organizational crime is extended from the definition of organized criminal to the organization of criminal law and the concept of leadership. As the organization offense is stipulated in the general provisions of criminal law of China, it is necessary to enter the criminal code and further comb the other organizations and the form of leadership through specific specific charges. The understanding of organizational behavior can be greatly from the meaning of life and criminal law. Meaning two points of distinction: the so-called organizational behavior in the meaning of life refers to the behavior of a person or thing, which is simply aggregated, based on a specific purpose of behavior, such as attracting, inducing, and drawing together; the so-called organizational behavior in the meaning of the criminal law refers to a specific criminal around a certain criminal purpose. The action adopted, such as initiating, planning, and setting up, is designed to achieve a considerable amount of crime. The leadership behavior does not exist in the general criminal law, so the leadership behavior can be defined as the right and left crime to promote the realization of the criminal purpose on the basis of its special status. Again, a brief introduction is made to the organization of the criminal law and the type of leadership behavior. The complex form of organization and leadership behavior and the changing state of existence make it do not tend to the same type or position in the criminal law of the mainland of China.
The second part discusses the basis and type of the crime of the organization and the independence of the leadership. First, to clarify the standard of the organized crime by legislation. In recent years, the legislation has enriched the provisions of the organized crime in the continental criminal law of China through the amendment. Crimes committed by the principal elements responsible for the organization and the role of command in the crime and the crime in spite of the organization are not embodied in the crime. But in the process of concrete practice, the crime of "organization" is included. Among them, 14 related crimes, such as organization, are involved in the crime of organizing specific behavior. The crime of prostitution, organizing the crime of selling human organs, organizing others to steal the crime of crossing the country (border), organizing the disabled and the crime of begging for children. Secondly, organize, lead the behavior of the pyramid selling activities, organize the behavior of the disabled, the children begging, and organize the actions of the minors to violate the public security management activities. Again, explain the single organization, and lead the leadership The difference between behavior and traditional mode is clearly distinguished from the basis of the act independence, and the legislative spirit or the change of criminal law policy is observed to some extent at the same time.
The third part analyzes the concurrence of the organization and leadership in the common crime. The so-called behavior concurrence refers to those behaviors that are closely similar to the behavior means or the behavior effectiveness and the organization and the leadership behavior in the case of joint crime. First, the organization, the leading line and the abettor are distinguished from the organization, and the abettor is motivated by the instigation of the abettor. To produce or strengthen the functional value of the offense, the latter has a certain function overlap with the organization and the leadership behavior. Furthermore, the organization criminals are often incorporated into the category of instigator before they have formed a systematic cognition. There is a profound origin between the two. The cognizance of the main identity under the same crime. Secondly, it distinguishes organization, leadership and practice. Practice refers to the behavior that is standardized into the evaluation of the constitutive elements of the crime. In accordance with the general provisions of the criminal law, the standard spirit of the organized crime and the complex joint crime are organized, and the behavior of the leadership is not only the nature of the behavior or the form and concrete of its existence. There are obvious differences in practice, but this does not affect the effectiveness of the two acts in the achievement of specific crime purposes. Here, the organization, the leadership behavior and the implementation of the unilateral comparison, more clear the complex common crime in the organization, the independent value of the existence of leadership, and clear the responsibility of the implementation of the crime.
The fourth part, clearly accept the double punishment organization, the existence of leadership behavior and the justifiability of responsibility. Organize, lead the behavior and organization of the underworld nature organization. The behavior of leading the terrorist organization is the behavior category of the few in the code of criminal law of our country. The actor should not only pay for the form of the criminal organization, but also be based on the organization members. The point of view is different from the opinion of some scholars. It is considered that the starting point of the legislation on the two evaluation of the subject of behavior under the circumstances above is not unsuitable, and the specific process of accountability does not exist in absolute sense. But in order to reflect the substantial fairness of the subject to the subject of responsibility, it may be possible to reduce the amount of the sentencing of the organization and the independent evaluation of the leadership behavior.
The fifth part is to distinguish the form of organization and leadership in criminal law. Any behavior which is evaluated by the criminal law embodies a certain longitudinal process in its own time dimension. The process itself is faced with the risk from the subjective and objective factors at any time, so it is not to carry out the crime or achieve the accomplished degree. The state of existence and the extension of the function are more complex than the general practice, so the grasp of its uncompleted form should not only pay attention to the actual termination of the behavior itself under different forms, but also consider whether there is a follow-up extension. In the case of organization, leadership behavior is not completed. First, because special types are defined as organized behavior not to constitute a crime, organizational behavior is regulated as an act of practice. The standard of achievement of such organization is not as complicated as the criminal group. So we only need to strictly grasp the legislation to distinguish its uncompleted form. The relevant standards are required. Secondly, because the joint crime has formed a considerable scale and a high degree of organization under the role of the organization and the leadership, the distinction between the organization and the uncompleted form of the leadership is to determine whether there is a subsequent extension of the action effect on the concrete practice at the same time when the behavior is terminated. Organization, leadership behavior. Although organizations, leading the behavior and organization of the underworld organization, the behavior of leading terrorist organizations is a type of behavior that accepts double punishment, but the state of the two is different. There is no possibility of differentiation in the case, and the organization, the behavior of leading a terrorist organization, because the crime is made clear by the legislation as an act offender, the process itself naturally has the space and the criminal meaning of the form.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924

【参考文献】