刑法被胁迫行为比较研究

发布时间：2018-05-18 15:08

本文选题：被胁迫行为 + 紧急避险　；参考：《兰州大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：被胁迫行为是刑法上一种独特的行为类型,其基于人的胁迫产生,被胁迫行为人为了防止威胁内容的实现而实施犯罪行为。正是由于威胁的介入,使得这类行为与刑法中规定的其他行为都存在着或多或少的差异。在两大法系内存在着诸多争议。英美法系刑法当中,被胁迫行为在符合一定的条件下即构成可宽恕辩护事由或合法辩护事由,在大陆法系刑法当中,大多将被胁迫行为同紧急避险相联系,将其纳入紧急避险的研究范畴之内。被胁迫行为在我国刑法当中没有单独的概念,对其研究主要集中在刑法中紧急避险和胁从犯当中。胁从犯作为我国刑法所独有的概念,为法律明文所规定,这不同于两大法系关于被胁迫行为的规定。这就存在一个问题即胁从犯的存在大幅缩减了被胁迫行为作为紧急避险在实践当中的适用范围,这有害于法律的稳定性与公信力。作为紧急避险时,被胁迫行为是不具有期待可能性的合法行为,而作为胁从犯时,被胁迫行为又是可以减轻或免除处罚的共同犯罪行为,这在适用上易产生定罪及量刑上的争议。笔者尝试从被胁迫行为概念入手,将被胁迫行为在两大法系立法及理论成果进行对比评析,将出于胁迫的紧急避险与胁从犯相关理论比较,进而完善被胁迫行为的相关理论,以期厘清被胁迫行为在刑法中的定位问题,为完善被胁迫行为在我国刑法中的相关规定提出自己的见解。本文拟围绕被胁迫行为的法律性质及法律定位的核心问题,分为四个部分进行论述。第一部分界定被胁迫行为的基本概念、构成要件等。具体分析被胁迫行为被刑法宽恕的法律依据。第二部分分析两大法系刑法中关于被胁迫行为的规定,得出被胁迫行为在不同法系立法中的不同之处,为下文具体分析被胁迫行为做铺垫。第三部分具体分析被胁迫行为在两大法系刑法理论研究中的理论区别,并对理论争议进行评析,得出二元论的被胁迫行为法律性质定性标准。第四部分区别我国立法当中被胁迫行为在胁从犯与紧急避险当中的表现,分析胁从犯与紧急避险相关规定的区别。通过前文的分析,反思我国被胁迫行为在刑法中的相关规定,对目前存在的问题进行思考并提出相应的建议。
[Abstract]:Coerced behavior is a unique type of behavior in criminal law, which is based on human coercion, and the coerced actor carries out criminal acts in order to prevent the realization of threatening content. Because of the intervention of threat, there are more or less differences between these acts and other acts stipulated in criminal law. There are many disputes in the two legal systems. In the criminal law of Anglo-American legal system, the act of being coerced under certain conditions can be condoned or justified. In the criminal law of the civil law system, most of the acts of coercion are related to the emergency avoidance. It is included in the study of emergency risk aversion. There is no separate concept of coerced behavior in Chinese criminal law. As a unique concept in the criminal law of our country, coerced crime is stipulated in the law, which is different from the provisions of the two major legal systems on coerced acts. There is a problem that the existence of coerced offenders greatly reduces the scope of application of coerced acts as an emergency to avoid risks in practice, which is harmful to the stability and credibility of the law. As an emergency to avoid danger, the act of being coerced is a lawful act without the possibility of expectation, while as an accomplice, the act of being coerced is a joint criminal act which can be mitigated or exempted from punishment. This is prone to conviction and sentencing controversy in the application. The author tries to start with the concept of coerced act, compares the legislative and theoretical achievements of coerced act in two legal systems, compares the relevant theories of emergency risk avoidance and coerced crime out of coercion, and then perfects the relevant theory of coerced behavior. In order to clarify the orientation of coerced acts in the criminal law, in order to improve the relevant provisions of coercive acts in our criminal law, put forward their own views. This paper focuses on the legal nature of coerced acts and the core issues of legal positioning, which is divided into four parts. The first part defines the basic concept of coerced acts, the constitutive elements and so on. Specific analysis of the legal basis for forgiving the act of coercion by the criminal law. The second part analyzes the provisions on coerced acts in the criminal law of the two legal systems, and draws the differences of the coerced acts in the legislation of different legal systems, which pave the way for the concrete analysis of the coerced acts below. The third part analyzes the theoretical differences of coerced acts in the theoretical study of criminal law in the two major legal systems, and analyzes the theoretical disputes, and draws the qualitative standard of the legal nature of dualism. The fourth part distinguishes the behavior of coerced behavior between coerced crime and emergency risk avoidance in our legislation, and analyzes the difference between coerced crime and emergency risk avoidance. Through the above analysis, this paper reflects on the relevant provisions of the criminal law of the coerced behavior in our country, thinks about the existing problems and puts forward the corresponding suggestions.
【学位授予单位】：兰州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.1

【参考文献】