本文選題：認(rèn)識(shí)因素 + 事實(shí)性認(rèn)識(shí)　； 參考：《鄭州大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：共同犯罪的故意作為犯罪故意的一種特殊形態(tài),并不是單個(gè)犯罪故意的簡(jiǎn)單結(jié)合,共同故意理論雖然是以單獨(dú)故意研究為基礎(chǔ),但更具復(fù)雜性和較深的研究意義。從構(gòu)成來看它具有雙重的認(rèn)識(shí)因素和雙重的意志因素,但認(rèn)識(shí)因素更具有基礎(chǔ)性的地位。共同犯罪人在實(shí)施共同犯罪時(shí),不僅只是對(duì)自己的行為有所認(rèn)識(shí)和控制,而且對(duì)整個(gè)共同犯罪都有認(rèn)識(shí)和控制。共同故意認(rèn)識(shí)因素的研究在英美法系和大陸法系都有涉及,且形成了很多不同的學(xué)說理論,但爭(zhēng)議點(diǎn)都離不開對(duì)共同故意具體認(rèn)識(shí)要素的討論。因此首先從事實(shí)認(rèn)識(shí)和違法性認(rèn)識(shí)兩個(gè)層面來加以研究,然后就是故意的認(rèn)識(shí)程度問題,達(dá)到什么樣的程度才能夠說做到了具體的明知,最后是討論在共同犯罪人出現(xiàn)認(rèn)識(shí)錯(cuò)誤情況的問題處理。探討共同故意認(rèn)識(shí)因素的關(guān)鍵之處就在于共同故意中不僅要對(duì)行為人自己的行為有事實(shí)性認(rèn)識(shí)和違法性認(rèn)識(shí),還應(yīng)當(dāng)認(rèn)識(shí)到其他共同行為人對(duì)事實(shí)性認(rèn)識(shí)和違法性認(rèn)識(shí)兩個(gè)方面的理解。而且在事實(shí)性認(rèn)識(shí)方面,共同行為人首先就是要對(duì)所實(shí)施的共同行為的性質(zhì)有所認(rèn)識(shí),其他還包括對(duì)行為的對(duì)象、行為的結(jié)果以及行為與結(jié)果之間的因果關(guān)系。此外,對(duì)于行為主體的認(rèn)識(shí)因?qū)餐室獾亩ㄗ锪啃逃幸欢ǖ挠绊?也宜被納入被認(rèn)識(shí)的范圍之中。在事實(shí)性認(rèn)識(shí)中的程度性認(rèn)識(shí)方面,單獨(dú)故意對(duì)于結(jié)果犯中對(duì)結(jié)果出現(xiàn)概率的可能性認(rèn)識(shí)在共同故意的認(rèn)識(shí)中也必然要有一定的認(rèn)識(shí)。與單獨(dú)故意不同的是,共同故意中還需對(duì)行為犯中行為出現(xiàn)的概率也應(yīng)當(dāng)有所認(rèn)識(shí)。另外在共同故意的違法性認(rèn)識(shí)方面,行為人不但要對(duì)自己的行為存在違法性認(rèn)識(shí)還需認(rèn)識(shí)到其他的共同行為人是否也有違法性認(rèn)識(shí),不僅如此,行為人還需認(rèn)識(shí)到其他共同行為人對(duì)其自身的行為也要具有違法性認(rèn)識(shí),否則依然不構(gòu)成共同故意。因?yàn)楣餐袨榈恼w性,在共同犯罪的過程中就很可能出現(xiàn)由于其中一人的認(rèn)識(shí)錯(cuò)誤而影響其他共同行為人的刑事責(zé)任。這是一個(gè)與單獨(dú)故意發(fā)生認(rèn)識(shí)錯(cuò)誤時(shí)很不同的處理結(jié)論。
[Abstract]:As a special form of criminal intent, the theory of joint intent is not a simple combination of individual criminal intent. Although the theory of joint intent is based on the study of individual intent, it has more complexity and deeper significance. It has double cognitive factors and double will factors, but cognitive factors have more basic position. When a joint offender commits a joint crime, he not only knows and controls his own behavior, but also knows and controls the whole joint crime. The study of common intentional cognition factors is involved in both Anglo-American law system and continental law system, and many different theories have been formed, but the controversial points can not be separated from the discussion of concrete cognitive elements of common intention. Therefore, first of all, it is studied from the two levels of fact cognition and illegal cognition, and then is the question of the degree of intentional understanding, to what extent can we say that we have achieved specific knowledge. Finally, it discusses how to deal with the problem of misunderstanding in the joint offender. The key to discuss the factors of common intention is that the common intention should not only have a factual and illegal understanding of the behavior of the perpetrator, We should also recognize other common actors' understanding of fact and illegality. Moreover, in the aspect of factual cognition, the common actor should first understand the nature of the common act, and the other includes the object of the act, the result of the act and the causality between the act and the result. In addition, the cognition of the behavior subject has certain influence on the common intentional conviction and sentencing, and it should also be included in the scope of being recognized. In the aspect of degree cognition in factual cognition, it is necessary to have a certain understanding of the possibility of the probability of the result appearing in the result crime alone in the common intention cognition. Different from individual intention, the probability of behavior in joint intent should also be recognized. In addition, in the aspect of mutual intentional illegality, the perpetrator should not only recognize the existence of illegality of his own behavior, but also know whether other common actors have illegality, not only that, The actor should also recognize that other common actors should also have illegal understanding of their own behavior, otherwise, it still does not constitute common intent. Because of the integrity of the common act, it is very likely that the criminal responsibility of the other common actor will be affected by the mistake of one of them in the process of joint crime. This is a very different conclusion from a deliberate error of understanding alone.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：鄭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D917

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 謝廣禮;追加故意是否屬于共同故意[J];律師世界;1996年05期

2 周欣;;犯罪共同故意新探[J];法律學(xué)習(xí)與研究;1987年05期

3 一言;;共同傷害應(yīng)有共同故意和共同行為[J];黨的建設(shè);1998年06期

4 姜偉;論共同故意[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));1994年04期

5 王艷芬;;單方面幫助他人實(shí)施犯罪不同于共同故意犯罪[J];福建法學(xué);2004年03期

6 付陽;王朋;;淺析共同違反治安管理行為和共同犯罪的區(qū)別[J];學(xué)理論;2013年07期

7 謝廣禮;追加故意是否屬于共同故意[J];法學(xué)雜志;1996年01期

8 賈宇;王東明;;論共同故意中的認(rèn)識(shí)因素[J];中國法學(xué);2009年06期

9 徐夢(mèng)萍;韓炳勛;;共同故意傷害犯罪的刑事責(zé)任實(shí)證研究[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2012年02期

10 袁博;;論預(yù)見可能性對(duì)共同故意成立范圍的影響——以受賄罪中的共犯為研究視角[J];政治與法律;2011年12期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前6條

1 劉濤;基于沒有共同故意不能成立共同犯罪情形[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2014年

2 常熟市檢察院 周建英;共同犯罪中共同故意認(rèn)識(shí)的界定[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2007年

3 馬登民;搶劫中一人起意冒充警察，，對(duì)其他同伙如何定性[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2003年

4 廣東省廣州市人民檢察院 衛(wèi)斌;“家庭型”受賄中 共同故意的認(rèn)定[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2012年

5 周建英;刑法中共同故意認(rèn)識(shí)因素的界定[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2005年

6 本報(bào)記者 王敏 婁義華 陳國琴;城管打傷攤販凸顯執(zhí)法素質(zhì)缺失[N];民主與法制時(shí)報(bào);2010年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 靳曉婷;共同故意認(rèn)識(shí)因素研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2017年

2 李慶莉;保險(xiǎn)詐騙罪共同犯罪實(shí)踐難題及解決[D];遼寧大學(xué);2016年

3 瞿美娟;論共同故意[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2005年

4 陸文洪;論共同故意[D];蘇州大學(xué);2006年

5 楊松;共同故意傷害犯罪中的責(zé)任認(rèn)定研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2009年

6 呂晶;片面共犯研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2009年

本文編號(hào)：1944733