误读与纠偏:“以刑制罪”的合理存在空间

发布时间：2018-11-26 14:53

【摘要】：近年来以刑制罪这一司法逻辑日益受到刑法学界的关注,然而,无论是否定说还是肯定说,对此都存在诸多误解。以刑制罪并不违背罪刑法定原则,没有摆脱法教义学的基本分析框架,也不会导致司法自由裁量权的滥用。同时,以刑制罪也并不意味着"重量刑轻定罪",刑法明文规定的犯罪构成要件对于刑法解释具有最基本的限定功能。以刑制罪并没有否定传统的刑法解释路径,司法三段论的基本逻辑仍然应当坚持。以刑制罪属于后果主义论证方法,可以归为目的解释方法的一种类型。作为后果类型之一的刑罚妥当性不但对于裁决的作出具有指引作用,而且对于法律解释也具有重要的批判性审查和校准功能。刑法体系与刑事政策的有机融合是刑法学发展的方向,在中国当下的刑法语境中,以刑制罪对沟通刑事政策与刑法体系具有重要作用。当然,以刑罚妥当性为导向的后果主义解释方法也不能过度,应当充分重视以刑制罪这一法律论证方法的风险防控。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the judicial logic of criminal system has been paid more and more attention to by the criminal law circle. However, there are many misunderstandings about this whether it is negation or affirmation. The system of punishment does not violate the principle of legality, does not get rid of the basic framework of legal dogmatics, nor leads to the abuse of judicial discretion. At the same time, the criminal system does not mean "light conviction", the constitution of the criminal law has the most basic limited function for the interpretation of criminal law. The basic logic of judicial syllogism should still be adhered to. The crime of punishment belongs to the method of argumentation of consequence, and can be classified as a kind of method of explanation of purpose. As one of the types of consequences, the appropriateness of penalty not only has a guiding role in making a verdict, but also has an important function of critical review and calibration for legal interpretation. The organic integration of criminal law system and criminal policy is the direction of the development of criminal law. In the present criminal law context of China, criminal system plays an important role in communicating criminal policy and criminal law system. Of course, the explanation method of consequence doctrine based on the appropriateness of penalty should not be excessive, and the risk prevention and control of the legal argumentation method of criminal system should be paid more attention to.
【作者单位】：北京大学法学院;
【分类号】：D914

【参考文献】