本文選題：公訴案件 + 刑事和解　； 參考：《福州大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文

【摘要】：面對(duì)傳統(tǒng)刑事司法效率低下、對(duì)案件當(dāng)事人的主體地位尊重不夠、無(wú)法實(shí)現(xiàn)個(gè)案正義、不能達(dá)到多方利益平衡、對(duì)罪犯改造效果不理想和不能充分體現(xiàn)現(xiàn)代刑法精神的困境，在國(guó)內(nèi)外刑法理論的影響下，刑事和解運(yùn)動(dòng)方興未艾。但是目前國(guó)內(nèi)學(xué)者對(duì)刑事和解制度的研究多停留在自訴案件上，無(wú)法在更大范圍內(nèi)發(fā)揮和解制度的優(yōu)勢(shì)。文章試圖擴(kuò)大刑事和解的適用范圍，將和解制度推廣到公訴案件。 文章先引出公訴案件刑事和解的必要性，然后分四個(gè)部分進(jìn)行闡述：第一部分，在借鑒學(xué)界對(duì)刑事和解定義的基礎(chǔ)上，力圖對(duì)公訴案件刑事和解制度的內(nèi)涵做出界定，著重突出案件的公訴性質(zhì)，強(qiáng)調(diào)和解的僅適用于偵查和起訴階段，和解過(guò)程中必須有公權(quán)力機(jī)關(guān)的參與原則。接著追溯了刑事案件和解的發(fā)展脈絡(luò)，并對(duì)公訴案件刑事和解制度的價(jià)值進(jìn)行了分析。 第二部分，從理論方面對(duì)公訴案件刑事和解進(jìn)行闡述，主要介紹了教育刑主義刑法理論、刑法的目的性理論、刑法的節(jié)制性理論、刑事法律關(guān)系主體理論，并指出公訴案件刑事和解存在與傳統(tǒng)公平正義理念相沖突、與國(guó)家公訴權(quán)相沖突兩大理論困境及解決的途徑。 第三部分，，從現(xiàn)實(shí)方面進(jìn)行論述，主要介紹了傳統(tǒng)和合文化與構(gòu)建和諧社會(huì)的大環(huán)境、寬嚴(yán)相濟(jì)的刑事司法政策、現(xiàn)行刑事法律規(guī)范對(duì)自訴案件刑事和解的有關(guān)規(guī)定、實(shí)務(wù)界的突破和嘗試五方面內(nèi)容，并對(duì)其存在的與現(xiàn)行刑事實(shí)體法相沖突、缺乏配套體制的現(xiàn)實(shí)困境予以化解。 第四部分，從孟廣虎一案引入公訴案件刑事和解應(yīng)遵循平等自愿、公平合理、利益平衡和公權(quán)力機(jī)關(guān)參與四大基本原則，然后從和解制度的主體、范圍、適用階段、適用條件、和解協(xié)議的內(nèi)容及效力和和解的調(diào)停機(jī)關(guān)六個(gè)方面進(jìn)行具體構(gòu)建，最后針對(duì)文章第三部分中提出的公訴案件刑事和解制度缺乏配套體制的困境，重點(diǎn)介紹了有罪答辯制度、檢察機(jī)關(guān)裁量權(quán)制度、被害人損害賠償金制度，進(jìn)一步完善公訴案件刑事和解制度運(yùn)行的體制環(huán)境。
[Abstract]:In the face of the low efficiency of traditional criminal justice, the lack of respect for the principal position of the parties to the case, the inability to achieve case justice, the inability to achieve a balance of interests, the unsatisfactory effect of reforming criminals and the plight of failing to fully reflect the spirit of modern criminal law. Under the influence of the criminal law theory at home and abroad, the criminal reconciliation movement is in the ascendant. But at present, the domestic scholars' research on the criminal reconciliation system mostly stays on the private prosecution cases, and can not give full play to the advantages of the reconciliation system in a larger scope. The article tries to expand the scope of criminal reconciliation and extend the system of reconciliation to public prosecution cases. The article first leads to the necessity of criminal reconciliation in public prosecution cases, and then expounds it in four parts: the first part, on the basis of drawing lessons from the definition of criminal reconciliation in academic circles, tries to define the connotation of criminal reconciliation system in public prosecution cases. It emphasizes the nature of public prosecution, emphasizes that reconciliation is only applicable to the stage of investigation and prosecution, and that there must be the principle of the participation of the public power organs in the process of reconciliation. Then it traces the development of criminal case reconciliation and analyzes the value of criminal reconciliation system in public prosecution cases. The second part expounds the criminal reconciliation of public prosecution cases from the theoretical aspect, mainly introduces the theory of educational criminal law, the purpose theory of criminal law, the abstinence theory of criminal law, the subject theory of criminal legal relationship. It also points out that the criminal reconciliation of public prosecution cases conflicts with the traditional concept of fairness and justice, and conflicts with the national right of public prosecution. The third part, from the realistic aspect, mainly introduces the traditional and harmonious culture and the construction of a harmonious society, the criminal justice policy of combining leniency and severity, and the relevant provisions of the current criminal law norms on the criminal reconciliation of private prosecution cases. The breakthrough and attempt of the practical circles in five aspects, and its existence with the current criminal substantive law conflict, the lack of supporting system to resolve the practical difficulties. In the fourth part, the criminal reconciliation of public prosecution cases introduced from Meng Guanghu case should follow the four basic principles of equality, fairness and reasonableness, balance of interests and participation of public power organs, and then from the subject, scope, application stage and applicable conditions of the reconciliation system. The content and effectiveness of the settlement agreement and the mediation organs of conciliation are concretely constructed. Finally, in view of the plight of the criminal reconciliation system of public prosecution cases lacking a supporting system, the author focuses on the system of guilty defense, which is proposed in the third part of the article. The system of procuratorial organs' discretion, the system of victim damages and the system of criminal reconciliation in public prosecution cases are further improved.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：福州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 冀祥德;;域外辯訴交易的發(fā)展及其啟示[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年03期

2 馬靜華;刑事和解的理論基礎(chǔ)及其在我國(guó)的制度構(gòu)想[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年04期

3 馬靜華;羅寧;;西方刑事和解制度考略[J];福建公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2006年01期

4 劉其威;;論我國(guó)建立犯罪被害人國(guó)家補(bǔ)償制度的必要性與可行性[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年05期

5 周少華;;刑法的目的及其觀念分析[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2008年02期

6 趙運(yùn)鋒;宋遠(yuǎn)升;;西方“輕刑化”思想根源探微[J];理論月刊;2007年10期

7 劉凌梅;西方國(guó)家刑事和解理論與實(shí)踐介評(píng)[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2001年01期

8 宋鎮(zhèn)藤;傅文魁;孫輝;陳龍;馮仁強(qiáng);謝佑平;陳衛(wèi)東;;刑事和解的配套措施[J];國(guó)家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年04期

本文編號(hào)：1795793