本文選題：刑民交叉 + 程序�。� 參考：《華東政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：刑民交叉案件成為困擾著理論界和實(shí)務(wù)界的難題，理論上的不完善和司法實(shí)踐中的矛盾促使我們對(duì)此類案件的處理方式進(jìn)行更深入的研究和分析，本文試圖從新的角度探討該類案件的解決之道。 首先，文章對(duì)于刑民交叉的概念進(jìn)行了分析，對(duì)刑民交叉案件的既有分類進(jìn)行了概括總結(jié)，繼而提出了自己對(duì)于該類案件分類的見(jiàn)解，即從實(shí)體上和程序上兩方面進(jìn)行分類，對(duì)這種新的分類方法進(jìn)行了闡述。接著從兩個(gè)案例入手引出刑民交叉案件的現(xiàn)狀和研究的必要性。即對(duì)于刑民交叉案件的既有的主流處理方式從實(shí)體交叉和程序交叉兩方面進(jìn)行了分析，得出“先刑后民”已成為司法實(shí)踐中刑民交叉案件的主導(dǎo)處理方式，但是此方式存在弊端，故對(duì)于刑民交叉案件的處理方式有研究的必要性。 其次，本文對(duì)于先刑后民處理方式相關(guān)的法律條文和司法解釋進(jìn)行了整理和羅列，并進(jìn)一步對(duì)于這些法律規(guī)定進(jìn)行分析，系統(tǒng)性、歷史性地還原法律規(guī)定本來(lái)的含義，由此得出關(guān)于刑民交叉法律的缺失之處和現(xiàn)有規(guī)定出現(xiàn)的漏洞和偏頗之處。接下來(lái)從歷史因素、現(xiàn)實(shí)問(wèn)題等方面分析了先刑后民方式出現(xiàn)和成為主導(dǎo)方式的原因。 再次，筆者對(duì)先刑后民進(jìn)行了一個(gè)客觀完整的分析。從實(shí)踐上和法律規(guī)定上總結(jié)先刑后民方式的優(yōu)勢(shì)與不足，進(jìn)行詳細(xì)的分析，并提出自己的看法，以期為接下來(lái)的處理方式的探究做準(zhǔn)備。 最后，本文對(duì)于刑民交叉案件的處理方式進(jìn)行探究，，筆者主要從實(shí)體交叉案件和程序交叉案件兩方面進(jìn)行研究。在實(shí)體方面，引入了二次違法性理論，并羅列了兩個(gè)典型案例從正反兩方面對(duì)比得出，此類刑民交叉必須先考慮民事法即前置法的規(guī)定，并且在觸犯刑事法律的時(shí)候再適用刑事法律加以規(guī)制。在程序交叉案件中，應(yīng)當(dāng)以刑民并進(jìn)為主要的方式，以先刑后民、先民后行方式為補(bǔ)充，區(qū)別不同情況加以適用。在文章的最后，筆者對(duì)于刑事附帶民事訴訟進(jìn)行了研究，提出了完善這一制度的方法，包括增加被害人的程序選擇權(quán)，增加精神損害賠償，以及注重民事程序的適用。保障程序的正義。 筆者通過(guò)以上這些方面的研究，能夠?qū)ο刃毯竺癜讣懈钊氲牧私猓瑢?duì)其現(xiàn)行的解決方式即“先刑后民”的方式有更深刻的認(rèn)識(shí)，并為該類案件的解決提供參考途徑，并期望早日解決司法實(shí)踐中這一難題。
[Abstract]:Criminal and civil cross cases have become a difficult problem in the theoretical and practical circles. The imperfect theory and the contradiction in judicial practice urge us to conduct more in-depth research and analysis on the handling of this kind of cases. This paper tries to discuss the solution of this kind of cases from a new angle. First of all, the article analyzes the concept of criminal intercross, summarizes the existing classification of criminal cases, and then puts forward his own views on the classification of this kind of cases, that is, from the substantive and procedural aspects of the classification. This new classification method is described. Secondly, the present situation and the necessity of the research on the criminal-civilian cross-cases are introduced from the two cases. That is to say, the existing mainstream handling methods of criminal and civilian cross-cases are analyzed from two aspects: substantive crossing and procedural crossing, and the conclusion is that "first punishment before civilian" has become the leading way of handling criminal and civilian cross-cases in judicial practice. However, there are some drawbacks in this way, so it is necessary to study the way of handling criminal cases. Secondly, the article collates and lists the relevant legal provisions and judicial interpretations of the first sentence and the civil treatment, and further analyzes these legal provisions, systematically and historically restoring the original meaning of the legal provisions. From this, the deficiency of the criminal law and the loopholes and bias of the existing provisions are obtained. Then, it analyzes the reason why the first punishment and the people become the dominant way from the historical factors, the realistic problems and so on. Again, the author carries on an objective and complete analysis to the first sentence and then to the people. This paper sums up the advantages and disadvantages of the first punishment after the people's way in practice and the legal provisions, analyzes in detail, and puts forward his own views, in order to prepare for the exploration of the following handling methods. Finally, this paper explores the way of handling criminal cases, the author mainly from the substantive cross-case and procedural cross-case two aspects of research. In the aspect of entity, the theory of secondary illegality is introduced, and two typical cases are listed from the positive and negative aspects. It is concluded that this kind of criminal and civilian crossing must first consider the provisions of the civil law, that is, the pre-law. And in violation of the criminal law applicable to the criminal law to regulate. In the cross-procedure cases, the main way should be the combination of criminal punishment and civilian behavior, and the first punishment should be supplemented by the latter, and the difference between different situations should be applied. At the end of the article, the author studies the incidental civil action and puts forward the methods of perfecting the system, including increasing the choice of procedure of the victim, increasing the compensation for mental damage, and paying attention to the application of civil procedure. Safeguarding procedural justice. Through the research of these aspects, the author can have a deeper understanding of the cases of first punishment and then people, and have a deeper understanding of its current solution, that is, "first sentence before people", and provide a reference way for the settlement of this kind of cases. And expect to solve this difficult problem in judicial practice as soon as possible.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 陳興良,胡建生,朱平,李克;關(guān)于“先刑后民”司法原則的反思[J];北京市政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年02期

2 朱江,于春生,劉紹武,張涌濤,龍翼飛;專題研討:“先刑后民”司法原則問(wèn)題研究[J];北京政法職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年03期

3 江偉,范躍如;刑民交叉案件處理機(jī)制研究[J];法商研究;2005年04期

4 陳杰人;打破“先刑后民”是私權(quán)回歸的要求[J];法律與生活;2005年02期

5 童可興;刑民交錯(cuò)案件的司法界定[J];人民檢察;2004年06期

6 魏東;鐘凱;;論刑民交叉及其關(guān)涉問(wèn)題[J];四川警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年04期

本文編號(hào)：1946871