实行过限问题研究

发布时间：2018-09-08 06:39

【摘要】：实行过限是从共同犯罪中衍生而来的一个问题。在刑法学研究领域中，实行过限是一个非常具有挑战性的论题，其不仅在理论上属于共同犯罪中的疑难问题之一，也是困扰司法实践的难题之一。因为实行过限发生在共同犯罪的过程中，二者的界限往往模糊不清，刑事责任的分配也让人左右为难。因此，对实行过限问题的研究具有重大的理论和实践意义。相对于实行过限问题的重要性，对其理论的研究就显得有些滞后，国内外刑法理论界系统探讨实行过限的文字十分寥寥，而且存在着各种观点的分歧和对立。我国刑法中没有关于实行过限的明确规定，目前刑法学界对于这一问题的研究较少，理论研究尚不深入，这给实践中准确认定实行过限以及合理分配刑事责任造成了极大的障碍。因此，准确地界定实行过限，，掌握实行过限的认定标准对于正确定罪量刑具有很大的实践意义。笔者试图在已有的研究成果基础之上，对实行过限相关问题进行梳理，提出一些自己的浅见，希望能够起到抛砖引玉的效果，以期更多人对这一问题加以关注与探讨。本文除结语之外共分为四个部分。第一部分为引言。首先从宏观和微观两个方面论述了选题的背景和意义，其次分别概述了国内外关于实行过限问题的研究现状，并通过对比国外研究指出了国内研究的不足之处。第二部分为实行过限的基本理论概述。首先通过分析实行过限的本质和过限行为的性质给出了实行过限的概念；然后分析了实行过限的理论基础和在刑法体系中的定位，认为实行过限与共犯错误有着本质的差别，实行过限是一个关于共同犯罪是否成立以及各共同犯罪人如何承担责任的问题。第三部分为实行过限的构成特征。实行过限是发生在共同犯罪中的一种特殊情形，是一种犯罪行为，故本部分从客观、主体、主观三个方面论证了实行过限的构成，为实践中实行过限的认定提供理论上的判断准则。第四部分为实行过限的认定。首先对现有认定理论进行了评析。其次对于司法实践中不同情形下的实行过限的具体认定进行了有针对性的分析和阐述。文中结合各种不同的犯罪性质、特点和具体事实情况，阐释了共同实行犯、教唆犯、帮助犯、组织犯四种不同共犯类型犯罪下实行过限的准确认定，尤其对共同实行犯中实行过限的认定作了重点论述，强调在其他共犯人明知实行犯正在实施超出共同谋议的行为但既不参与也不阻止的情况下应根据“义务违反说”来判定是否实行过限。
[Abstract]:Excessive restriction is a problem arising from joint crime. In the field of criminal law research, excessive restriction is a very challenging topic, which is not only one of the difficult problems in the theory of joint crime, but also one of the puzzling problems in judicial practice. Because the limit occurs in the process of joint crime, the boundaries of the two are often blurred, the distribution of criminal responsibility is also a dilemma. Therefore, it is of great theoretical and practical significance to study the problem of over-limitation. Relative to the importance of carrying out the problem of over-limitation, the study of its theory appears to be lagging behind. There are very few words in the theoretical circle of criminal law at home and abroad to discuss the practice of over-limitation, and there are different opinions and opposites. There is no explicit stipulation about carrying out excessive restriction in criminal law of our country. At present, there are few researches on this issue in the criminal law circle, and the theoretical research is not deep enough. This has caused great obstacles to the accurate identification of excessive limitation and reasonable distribution of criminal responsibility in practice. Therefore, it is of great practical significance to accurately define the implementation of excessive limits and grasp the standards for the correct conviction and sentencing. On the basis of the existing research results, the author tries to sort out the related problems of carrying out the restrictions, and put forward some simple views, hoping to play a role in the effect of drawing the jade, with a view to paying more attention and discussion to this problem. This paper is divided into four parts except the conclusion. The first part is the introduction. Firstly, this paper discusses the background and significance of the topic from the macro and micro aspects, and then summarizes the research status quo of the implementation of over-limitation at home and abroad, and points out the deficiencies of the domestic research by comparing the foreign studies. The second part is an overview of the basic theory of over-limitation. By analyzing the nature of the practice of excessive limitation and the nature of the behavior of excessive limitation, this paper gives the concept of the practice of excessive limitation, and then analyzes the theoretical basis and the positioning in the criminal law system, and thinks that there is an essential difference between the practice of excessive restriction and the error of complicity. Excessive restriction is a question about whether the joint crime is established and how the joint offenders bear the responsibility. The third part is the constitution characteristic of carrying out excessive limit. The implementation of excessive limit is a special situation and a kind of criminal act that occurs in joint crime, so this part demonstrates the constitution of implementation of excessive limit from three aspects: objective, subject and subjective. It provides a theoretical criterion for the practice of over-limitation. The fourth part is the determination of the implementation of excessive limits. First of all, the existing identification theory is evaluated. Secondly, the specific identification of the practice of excessive limit in different situations in judicial practice is analyzed and elaborated. Combined with the nature, characteristics and specific facts of various crimes, this paper explains the accurate identification of the overlimitation of four types of accomplices: joint accomplice, abettor, aider, and organized crime. In particular, the author focuses on the determination of excessive restriction in the joint implementation of the crime. It is emphasized that where the other accomplices know that the perpetrator is committing an act beyond the common counsel but neither participates in nor prevents it, it is necessary to judge whether or not the limitation is imposed on the basis of the "breach of obligation".
【学位授予单位】：河北经贸大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.1

【参考文献】