帮助犯罪分子逃避处罚罪实践争议问题研究

发布时间：2018-10-15 18:01

【摘要】：帮助犯罪分子逃避处罚罪是1997年刑法新增加的罪名,规定在第417条。由于刑法条文罪状表述不明确,司法解释也没有及时补充完善,对本罪认识上的分歧影响了其适用。本文试图分析研究帮助犯罪分子逃避处罚罪的实践争议问题,希望对本罪的理论研究及司法实践提供参考。本文除引言和结语外,总共三个部分：第一部分用四个实案引出帮助犯罪分子逃避处罚罪实践争议问题。第二部分详细分析帮助犯罪分子逃避处罚罪实践争议问题。这部分是本文的主体部分,主要从犯罪构成要件实践争议问题、犯罪形态实践争议问题及与其他罪名界限实践争议问题三个方面详细加以阐述。首先,犯罪构成要件方面,认为“有查禁犯罪活动职责的国家机关工作人员”包括两类：一类是司法工作人员,另一类是税务、工商、质监、卫生等行政执法人员及行政监察人员。本罪行为方式既包括作为,也包括不作为。行为人帮助犯罪分子逃避处罚必须利用其职责便利。“逃避处罚”包括“免受处罚”和“减轻处罚"。本罪中的“犯罪分子”包括违反刑法应追究刑事责任但尚未被立案侦查的人、犯罪嫌疑人、被告人以及经法院判决确定为有罪的人。其次,对犯罪形态实践争议问题进行分析,认为应以行为人实施的帮助行为是否妨碍了司法机关查禁犯罪活动为既遂标准。对于共同犯罪及罪数形态的认定,司法解释已作出明确规定,依照执行即可。最后,对司法实践中与本罪难以区分的徇私枉法罪、帮助伪造证据罪、徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件罪与本罪的界限简要作了分析。同时,本文开头引入的四个争议案件将在上述三个问题论述中一一进行评析。第三部分提出帮助犯罪分子逃避处罚罪实践争议问题的解决思路及具体建议。
[Abstract]:Helping criminals evade punishment is a new offence in the 1997 Criminal Code, stipulated in Article 417. Because the criminal law is not clear about the crime and the judicial interpretation has not been supplemented in time, the difference in the understanding of the crime has affected its application. This paper attempts to analyze and study the practical controversy of helping criminals evade punishment, hoping to provide a reference for the theoretical research and judicial practice of this crime. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, there are three parts: the first part uses four real cases to lead to the practical dispute of helping criminals evade punishment. The second part analyzes the dispute of helping criminals evade punishment in detail. This part is the main part of this paper, mainly from the elements of crime practice dispute, crime form practice dispute and other charges of practical dispute in three aspects to elaborate in detail. First of all, with regard to the constitutive elements of a crime, it is considered that "functionaries of state organs who have the duty to suppress criminal activities" include two categories: one is judicial personnel, the other is taxation, industry and commerce, and quality supervision. Health and other administrative law enforcement personnel and administrative supervisors. The behavior of this crime includes both acts and omissions. The perpetrator must make use of his duty to help criminals escape punishment. "escape from punishment" includes "immunity" and "mitigation". The "criminals" in this crime include those who should be investigated for violating the criminal law but who have not been put on file for investigation, suspects, defendants and those who have been found guilty by the court. Secondly, the author analyzes the controversial problem of criminal form practice, and thinks that the accomplished standard should be whether the helping act of the perpetrator hinders the judicial organs from suppressing the criminal activity. For the joint crime and the definition of the number of crimes, the judicial interpretation has made a clear provision, according to the execution can be. Finally, the author makes a brief analysis of the crime of perverting the law for favoritism, helping to forge evidence, and not transferring criminal cases to the crime of favoritism, which is difficult to distinguish from this crime in judicial practice. At the same time, the four controversial cases introduced at the beginning of this paper will be evaluated one by one in the above three issues. In the third part, the author puts forward some ideas and concrete suggestions to help criminals evade punishment.
【学位授予单位】：内蒙古大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】