本文選題：犯罪主觀構成要件　切入點：刑事證明　出處：《江西財經大學》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：犯罪主觀構成要件的內容有犯罪故意、犯罪過失、犯罪目的和犯罪動機。我國刑法堅持主客觀相一致的原則,犯罪主觀構成要件是我國犯罪構成要件的一個重要內容,它對定罪量刑都具有重要的作用。但是犯罪主觀方面存在于行為人的腦海中,其他人很難知道其真實想法。在某些特殊的場合,某些行為人自己都不能確定行為時的內心想法。因此對比而言,犯罪主觀構成要件比犯罪客觀要件的證明更加困難。在司法實踐中,犯罪主觀構成要件的證明常常讓司法人員感到困惑。在具體個案中,究竟是堅持疑罪從無原則,還是綜合全案證據進行推理,司法人員往往根據自己的理解作出自己的選擇。于是出現兩種錯誤傾向。一種傾向是,在認定主觀構成要件時過于謹慎小心,過于機械理解法律,不能正確運用邏輯推理,導致放縱犯罪。另一種傾向是,在認定主觀構成要件時過于隨意,對相關司法解釋存在誤解,事實上降低了證明標準,導致客觀歸罪。因此,本文試從實踐中出現的問題出發(fā),嘗試在對犯罪主觀構成要件的具體內容進行剖析以及對刑事證明的基礎理論進行闡述的基礎上,提出實踐當中證明主觀構成要件的各種方法及各種方法運用需要注意的地方,并結合具體案例進行分析,以期給司法實踐提供一些參考。論文由四部分構成:第一部分為犯罪主觀構成要件概述。厘清證明對象的概念,包括對犯罪故意、犯罪過失、犯罪目的、明知和非法占有為目的進行概說,為后文的研究奠定基礎。第二部分為刑事訴訟證明的基本原理。包括微觀方面和宏觀方面。微觀方面具體內容為刑事訴訟證明的基本規(guī)律。宏觀方面包括證明責任、證明標準等,在此基礎上對犯罪主觀構成要件的證明困難特殊性進行論述。第三部分系統(tǒng)闡述了犯罪主觀構成要件的各種證明方法。包括運用直接證據證明、運用間接證據推理證明、刑事推定、被告人承擔部分責任、階梯型罪名運用、無罪過責任、法律擬制。分析了具體運用各種方法需要注意的地方。刑事推定和被告人承擔部分責任需謹慎適用。階梯型罪名運用、無罪過責任、法律擬制屬于立法方法,解決證明困難有限。第四部分為克服主觀要件證明困難的路徑探析。提出解決犯罪主觀證明困難的主要方法仍然是通過間接證據證明,重點闡述了間接證據證明的證明思路、證據要求、論證方法,彌補其存在不足。最后通過典型案例來論述運用間接證據證明犯罪主觀要件的具體運用。
[Abstract]:The contents of the subjective elements of crime of intentional crime and negligent crime, criminal purpose and motive for the crime. The criminal law of our country adhere to the principle of consistent subjective and objective, subjective elements of crime is an important content of constitutive elements of crime in our country, it plays an important role in conviction and sentencing. But the subjective aspect of crime exists in the behavior of people in my mind, it is hard for others to know their true thoughts. In some special occasions, some of the acts themselves are not sure the behavior of inner thoughts. Therefore, in contrast, subjective elements of crime is more difficult than that of objective elements of a crime. In the judicial practice, the subjective elements of crime constitution that often makes judicial personnel confused. In specific cases, whether adhere suspected crime from unprincipled, or the whole case evidence reasoning, judicial personnel often according to their own understanding of their own choice for Optional. So there is two wrong tendencies. A tendency is identified in the subjective elements are too cautious, too mechanistic understanding of the law, not the correct use of logical reasoning, to indulge crime. Another tendency is, in the identification of the subjective elements is too arbitrary, the relevant judicial interpretation of misunderstanding, in fact reduce the standard of proof, resulting in objectivity. Therefore, based on the problems arising from practice, try to analyze the specific content of the subjective elements of crime constitution and the foundation of the basic theory of criminal proof, the practice of various methods that subjective elements and the need to pay attention to the use of various methods where, combined with a specific case analysis, in order to provide some reference to the judicial practice. The thesis consists of four parts: the first part is the subjective elements of crime. To clarify the certificate The concept of Ming objects, including the intentional crime and negligent crime, criminal purpose, and that for the purpose of illegal possession of, to lay the foundation for the following research. The second part is the basic principle of criminal litigation proof. Including the micro and macro aspects. The micro aspects of the specific content as the basic rules of proof of criminal proceedings. Macro including the burden of proof, standard of proof, discusses the particularity on the basis of the subjective elements of crime that pose difficulties. The third part elaborates various subjective elements of the crime proof method. Including the use of direct evidence, indirect evidence reasoning, criminal presumption, the defendant bear part of the responsibility, the use of ladder type charges innocence, responsibility, legal fiction. Analysis of the need to pay attention to specific use of various methods. The criminal presumption and the defendant bear part of the responsibility should be cautious. With a ladder type. Use the liability without fault, crime, law belongs to the legislative method, to solve the difficulties. The fourth part is to prove the finite element to prove the path of overcoming subjective difficulties. Puts forward the main methods to solve the crime subjective proof is still difficult by indirect evidence, focuses on the method of proof, indirect evidence, evidence requirements and the proof method, to make up for its shortcomings. Finally, through the typical case to discuss the specific use of indirect evidence of subjective elements of crime.

【學位授予單位】：江西財經大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前6條

1 王新;;我國刑法中“明知”的含義和認定——基于刑事立法和司法解釋的分析[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2013年01期

2 李昌盛;;德國刑事協(xié)商制度研究[J];現代法學;2011年06期

3 褚福民;;證明困難解決體系視野下的刑事推定[J];政法論壇;2011年06期

4 閆召華;;論拒供困局及其突破[J];中國人民公安大學學報(社會科學版);2011年03期

5 吳丹紅;;犯罪主觀要件的證明——程序法和實體法的一個聯(lián)接[J];中國刑事法雜志;2010年02期

6 張明楷;論財產罪的非法占有目的[J];法商研究;2005年05期

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 王彪;犯罪主觀要件證明問題研究[D];西南政法大學;2014年

相關碩士學位論文 前6條

1 姚瓊;論犯罪主觀要件的證明[D];上海交通大學;2014年

2 陳歡;間接證據定案規(guī)則研究[D];西南政法大學;2014年

3 戈蕊;毒品犯罪主觀構成要件證明問題研究[D];燕山大學;2013年

4 聶臻;論犯罪主觀方面的認定[D];復旦大學;2012年

5 胡藝馨;刑事主觀構成要件證明問題研究[D];燕山大學;2012年

6 靳琳;間接證據及其證明作用探討[D];中國政法大學;2011年

，

本文編號：1645794