【摘要】：通過(guò)比較考察發(fā)現(xiàn),在我國(guó)、日本和德國(guó),雖然刑法關(guān)于免除刑罰的規(guī)定存在差異,但在實(shí)務(wù)中免除刑罰的適用均屬例外情況。適用免除刑罰既可以緩和制裁,又可以通過(guò)建構(gòu)"刑事程序—(非刑罰性的刑事或)行政制裁"模式來(lái)發(fā)揮強(qiáng)化制裁的作用,并且具備審前分流措施及形式裁判所不具備的優(yōu)勢(shì)。為了充分發(fā)揮免除刑罰制度在制裁多元化中的作用,就必須承認(rèn)刑法第37條具有作為獨(dú)立的刑罰免除事由的一面;并且通過(guò)法解釋學(xué)工作,可以將強(qiáng)化制裁的功能納入該條的適用范圍。同時(shí),第37條還具有作為具體的刑罰免除事由的概括性規(guī)定的一面。在這兩種情況下,都可以依據(jù)第37條對(duì)相應(yīng)犯罪科處非刑罰性的刑事制裁措施。
[Abstract]:Through comparative investigation, it is found that in China, Japan and Germany, although there are differences in the provisions of the criminal law on the exemption of punishment, the application of exemption is an exception in practice. The application of exemption from punishment can not only alleviate the sanctions, but also strengthen the sanctions by constructing the model of "criminal procedure-(non-penal criminal or) administrative sanctions". And has the pretrial diversion measure and the form judgment does not have the superiority. In order to give full play to the role of the system of exemption from punishment in the diversification of sanctions, it is necessary to recognize that Article 37 of the Criminal Law has its own side as an independent reason for the exemption of punishment. Through the work of legal hermeneutics, the function of strengthening sanctions can be brought into the scope of application of this article. At the same time, Article 37 also has a general stipulation as a specific reason for the exoneration of penalty. In both cases, non-penal measures may be imposed on the corresponding crime section pursuant to article 37.
【作者單位】： 中國(guó)政法大學(xué);
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2
，

本文編號(hào)：2327341