本文選題：海上船舶碰撞　切入點(diǎn)：刑事責(zé)任　出處：《大連海事大學(xué)》2009年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】： 近幾年,船舶碰撞事故數(shù)量在不斷增加,嚴(yán)重程度也逐漸加大。經(jīng)調(diào)查,絕大多數(shù)的船舶碰撞是由于人為因素造成的�，F(xiàn)行法律對(duì)于海上船舶碰撞的民事責(zé)任和行政責(zé)任規(guī)定較為詳細(xì),但是單憑民事責(zé)任和行政責(zé)任這兩種處罰方式,不僅常常滿足不了受害方的心理安撫的要求,也遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)達(dá)不到切實(shí)防止碰撞事故發(fā)生的目的。目前,我國立法中有關(guān)碰撞事故刑事責(zé)任的規(guī)定僅限于我國刑法第133條規(guī)定的交通肇事罪,而該罪直接應(yīng)用在船舶碰撞事故中存在很大的技術(shù)障礙,目前尚沒有專門的司法解釋與其配套適用,導(dǎo)致實(shí)踐中適用該罪的可操作性大打折扣。 本文中“船舶”系指我國海商法第3條規(guī)定下的船舶,“船舶碰撞”僅限于兩船之間發(fā)生的碰撞,且系因過失造成的船舶碰撞。筆者認(rèn)為,追究海上船舶碰撞事故的刑事責(zé)任是很有必要的,也是切實(shí)可行的,這可以從統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)、經(jīng)驗(yàn)總結(jié)、法律依據(jù)、理論基礎(chǔ)和可借鑒的實(shí)踐案例等方面得到佐證。 本文重點(diǎn)分析了海上交通肇事罪的犯罪構(gòu)成以及在船舶碰撞事故中適用的困難和不足。該罪的犯罪客體是海上正常的航行秩序以及海洋環(huán)境的清潔,犯罪客觀方面表現(xiàn)為行為人違反海上交通運(yùn)輸管理法規(guī),因而發(fā)生重大交通事故,致人重傷、死亡或者導(dǎo)致重大的油污損害。該罪的犯罪主體是指具體從事海上交通運(yùn)輸業(yè)務(wù),同保障交通安全有直接關(guān)系的人員,包括船長、船舶所有人、船舶經(jīng)營人、船舶管理人、對(duì)船舶碰撞事故負(fù)有直接責(zé)任的船員、引航員等。犯罪的主觀方面為過失。在海上的碰撞事故中直接適用我國刑法第133條的規(guī)定的難點(diǎn)問題集中表現(xiàn)在如何確定罪與非罪的界限以及在程序上如何兼容的問題。 鑒于目前的實(shí)際情況,筆者建議,制定相關(guān)的司法解釋,予以解決相關(guān)疑難問題,也可參考刑法規(guī)定的“重大飛行事故罪”制定“重大航行事故罪”。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the number of ship collision accidents has been increasing, and the severity has gradually increased. The majority of ship collisions are caused by human factors. The current law provides in detail the civil liability and administrative liability for the collision of ships at sea, but only by the two forms of punishment, civil liability and administrative liability. Not only is it often unable to satisfy the psychological comfort requirements of the aggrieved party, but it also falls far short of the objective of effectively preventing collision accidents. At present, The criminal liability of collision accident in the legislation of our country is limited to the traffic accident crime stipulated in Article 133 of the Criminal Law of our country, and there are great technical obstacles in the direct application of this crime in the ship collision accident. At present, there is no special judicial interpretation and its matching application, resulting in the practice of the applicability of the crime greatly reduced. In this paper, "ship" refers to a ship under Article 3 of the Maritime Law of China. The term "ship collision" is limited to the collision between two ships and is a collision caused by fault. It is necessary and feasible to investigate the criminal responsibility of collision accident of ships at sea, which can be proved from statistical data, experience summary, legal basis, theoretical basis and practical cases that can be used for reference. This paper focuses on the analysis of the criminal constitution of the crime of causing traffic accidents at sea and the difficulties and deficiencies applicable in the collision of ships. The object of the crime is the normal navigation order at sea and the cleanliness of the marine environment. The objective aspect of the crime is that the perpetrator violates the laws and regulations governing maritime traffic and transportation, resulting in a major traffic accident, causing serious injury, death or serious oil pollution damage. Persons directly related to the protection of traffic safety, including the master, the owner, the operator, the manager of the ship, and the crew members who are directly responsible for the collision accident, Pilot and so on. The subjective aspect of crime is negligence. In the collision accident at sea, the difficulty of directly applying the provisions of Article 133 of our criminal law lies in how to determine the boundary between crime and non-crime and how to compatible with each other in procedure. In view of the actual situation at present, the author suggests that the relevant judicial interpretation should be formulated to solve the related difficult problems, and that the crime of "major flight accident" should also be formulated with reference to the criminal law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：大連海事大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：D924.3

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 閻二鵬;;海上犯罪的立法規(guī)制之模式構(gòu)想[J];海南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2013年02期

2 冷正珍;;海上交通肇事逃逸的刑事責(zé)任探析——以首例涉外海上交通肇事逃逸案為例[J];世界海運(yùn);2013年08期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王慧;水上交通犯罪刑事責(zé)任研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2013年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 曹怡;論海洋生態(tài)損害民事訴訟檢察機(jī)關(guān)原告資格[D];大連海事大學(xué);2011年

2 蘇楊;水上交通肇事的刑法分析及立法完善[D];大連海事大學(xué);2012年

3 何珍;交通安全犯罪的罪名體系研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1590439