本文關(guān)鍵詞：論犯罪未遂的處罰根據(jù)　出處：《吉林大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 犯罪未遂 客觀主義 客觀危險(xiǎn)說 可能

【摘要】：根據(jù)客觀主義的立場,犯罪的本質(zhì)是行為對國家所保護(hù)的利益價(jià)值的侵害或危險(xiǎn)。刑罰的目的在于尋求公正,國家發(fā)動刑罰的實(shí)質(zhì)是剝奪了犯罪分子的某種法益,是為了國家、社會和其他個人法益而要求犯罪人不得已做出的犧牲。犯罪未遂處罰根據(jù)的理論存在主觀主義、客觀主義、折中主義以及我國的主客觀相統(tǒng)一理論的對立。主觀主義理論認(rèn)為行為人主觀方面的意思、人格、動機(jī)的危險(xiǎn)是科處刑罰的基礎(chǔ),應(yīng)予懲罰的不是犯罪行為本身,而是犯罪人。主觀主義過度重視社會秩序的保護(hù),擴(kuò)張了未遂犯的存在范圍,與刑法所保護(hù)的是法益的立場相違背�？陀^主義理論認(rèn)為犯罪是行為人的行為對刑法所保護(hù)的法益的侵害和危險(xiǎn)�？陀^主義重視行為的概念,并相應(yīng)的把保護(hù)法益看做是刑法的任務(wù)�？陀^主義理論將刑法視為保護(hù)法益的最后一道防線,起到了對刑罰權(quán)的合理規(guī)范和制約的作用,消除了刑罰適用中的不確定現(xiàn)象,是解釋犯罪未遂處罰根據(jù)的較為妥當(dāng)?shù)睦碚�。折中主義理論(印象理論)認(rèn)為犯罪未遂的處罰根據(jù)在于行為人的行為動搖了公眾對法秩序的信賴,強(qiáng)調(diào)犯罪未遂必不可少的兩個條件:行為人的犯罪意思和行為動搖法秩序的印象。由于印象理論舍棄了犯罪的本質(zhì)要素,即行為的法益侵害性,因此印象理論偏向了主觀主義,并且使公眾產(chǎn)生了法秩序的動搖的印象是一種是主觀的存在,沒有具體的可操作性。我國刑法學(xué)者以主客觀相統(tǒng)一的原則為指導(dǎo)思想,認(rèn)為犯罪未遂犯承擔(dān)刑事責(zé)任的根據(jù)在其具備了犯罪構(gòu)成四個方面的要件,但這只是做了表層分析,犯罪未遂不是犯罪構(gòu)成要件的修正,而是犯罪構(gòu)成要件要素的修正。通過相關(guān)理論的評析,可以初步得出客觀主義理論在解釋犯罪未遂處罰根據(jù)時是較為妥當(dāng)?shù)�。又根�?jù)對犯罪未遂行為危險(xiǎn)的判斷不同,客觀主義犯罪未遂理論又可分為具體危險(xiǎn)說和客觀危險(xiǎn)說。具體危險(xiǎn)說以一般人所能認(rèn)識到的情況以及行為人所特別認(rèn)識到的情況為基礎(chǔ),根據(jù)一般人是否感受到結(jié)果發(fā)生的危險(xiǎn)來判斷危險(xiǎn)性有無。由于該理論不當(dāng)?shù)匕盐瘴此旆傅奶幜P根據(jù),容易擴(kuò)大未遂犯的處罰范圍,混淆了違法與責(zé)任的判斷等原因,因而是不可取的�？陀^危險(xiǎn)說的基本主張是:對危險(xiǎn)進(jìn)行判斷時應(yīng)該考慮可能影響結(jié)果的一切情況,從客觀的立場出發(fā)綜合所有因素進(jìn)行判斷�？陀^危險(xiǎn)說由于堅(jiān)持事后判斷,強(qiáng)調(diào)未遂犯中的危險(xiǎn)是已經(jīng)造成法益的確定的、現(xiàn)實(shí)的危險(xiǎn),所以其縮小了未遂犯的處罰范圍,實(shí)現(xiàn)了刑法的保障人權(quán)功能。但是有批評意見認(rèn)為堅(jiān)持客觀危險(xiǎn)說可能得出所有的未遂犯都是不能犯的結(jié)論,并且客觀危險(xiǎn)說判斷危險(xiǎn)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)并不明確。筆者通過分析認(rèn)為客觀危險(xiǎn)說的這種事后危險(xiǎn)在哲學(xué)上屬于抽象的可能,而判斷的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)就是全部客觀事實(shí)是否包含阻止結(jié)果發(fā)生的具有隨機(jī)性、易變性的因素�？陀^危險(xiǎn)說以純粹的客觀危險(xiǎn)作為犯罪未遂的處罰根據(jù),確保了刑罰適用的客觀標(biāo)準(zhǔn),具有刑罰適用的正當(dāng)性,因此應(yīng)當(dāng)提倡。
[Abstract]:According to the standpoint of objectivism, the essence of the crime is the infringement or danger of the act on the value of the interests protected by the state. The purpose of punishment is to seek justice. The essence of a state's punishment is to deprive criminals of certain legal interests, which is for the state, society and other personal interests to require criminals to make sacrifices. The theory of the punishment based on the attempted crime has the opposition of subjectivism, objectivism, compromise and the unity of the subjective and objective theory of our country. Subjectivism theory believes that the risk of the subjective aspects of human behavior, personality, motivation is the foundation to be punished, should be punished is not a crime itself, but the crime. Subjectivism overviews the protection of the social order and expands the scope of the attempted offense, which is contrary to the position of the legal interests protected by the criminal law. The theory of objectivism holds that crime is the infringement and danger of the act of the perpetrator on the legal interests protected by the criminal law. Objectivism pays attention to the concept of behavior and regards the protection of legal benefits as the task of criminal law. Objectivism theory regards criminal law as the last line of defense for protecting legal interests. It plays a role in regulating and restricting the penalty power. It eliminates the uncertainty in the application of penalty, and it is a more appropriate theory to explain the punishment basis of attempted crime. The theory of eclecticism (impression theory) holds that the punishment basis for attempted crime is that the behavior of the actor has shaken the public's trust in the law order, and emphasized the two essential conditions for attempted crime: the impression of the criminal's intention and behavior to shake the law order. Because the theory of impression has abandoned the essential elements of crime, that is, the violation of legal interests, so the impression theory has been biased towards subjectivism, and it has caused the public to shake the impression of legal order. It is subjective existence and no concrete operability. China's criminal law scholars to the unity of subjective and objective principle as the guiding ideology that attempted crime committed criminal responsibility according to the requirements in four aspects of crime constitution, but this is only done surface analysis, correction elements of attempted crime is not a crime, but the crime constitution essential factors correction. Through the analysis of relevant theories, it is possible to conclude that the theory of objectivism is more appropriate in explaining the punishment of attempted crime. According to the different judgment of the risk of attempted crime, the theory of objectivism crime attempted can be divided into concrete danger and objective danger. The specific danger is based on the situation that most people can recognize and the situation that the actor especially recognizes. Due to the improper grasp of the punishment basis of attempted offense, it is easy to expand the punishment scope of attempted offenders, and confuse the reasons of illegality and responsibility judgment, so it is not advisable. The basic idea of the objective danger theory is that when we judge the danger, we should consider all the circumstances that may affect the result. We should take all factors into account from the objective standpoint. The objective danger theory insists that the risk of attempted offense is determined and dangerous because of insisting on afterwards judgement. Therefore, it narrowed the punishment scope of attempted offense and realized the function of criminal law to protect human rights. But there is a critical opinion that insisting on objective danger may come to the conclusion that all attempted offenders can not be committed, and the objective danger is not clear. The author thinks that the ex post danger of objective danger is an abstract possibility in philosophy, and the criterion of judgement is whether all objective facts contain the random and changeable factors that prevent the result. The objective danger theory is based on the pure objective danger as the punishment basis for attempted crime, which ensures the objective standard of penalty application, and has the legitimacy of penalty application. Therefore, it should be promoted.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D914

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 章志圖;淺談我國刑法對犯罪未遂的處罰[J];承德民族師專學(xué)報(bào);2001年03期

2 姜彩鳳;;淺析犯罪未遂與犯罪的預(yù)備、中止和既遂的區(qū)別[J];赤峰教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2001年06期

3 朱正余,劉光輝;中意犯罪未遂比較研究[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2002年07期

4 曾粵興;犯罪未遂若干問題研究[J];金陵法律評論;2002年02期

5 程建鋒;犯罪未遂有關(guān)問題的探討[J];湖北成人教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年05期

6 鄭華偉;;犯罪未遂程度區(qū)分芻議[J];人民檢察;2006年12期

7 陳歡水;楊朝勇;;論單位犯罪未遂存在的根據(jù)[J];中共貴州省委黨校學(xué)報(bào);2006年05期

8 高成霞;朱麗珍;;內(nèi)地和臺灣、澳門犯罪未遂比較[J];法制與社會;2007年05期

9 胡江;;論犯罪未遂的處罰根據(jù)[J];湖南公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2008年03期

10 劉仕雯;許承余;;中國民國時期與現(xiàn)行刑法關(guān)于犯罪未遂的比較研究[J];新學(xué)術(shù);2008年03期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 陶建芬;是犯罪未遂還是中止[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2003年

2 實(shí)習(xí)記者 王芳;商標(biāo)侵權(quán)犯罪未遂也要依法判刑[N];北京商報(bào);2011年

3 山西省晉中市工商局 高小超　閆蕙;銷售偽劣產(chǎn)品犯罪未遂應(yīng)依法移送[N];中國工商報(bào);2012年

4 林亞剛 沈明;如何確定犯罪未遂中“意志以外的原因”[N];檢察日報(bào);2004年

5 徐士軍 何燕燕;淺談犯罪未遂[N];大眾科技報(bào);2006年

6 王琦;瀆職罪犯罪未遂狀態(tài)及其處罰[N];檢察日報(bào);2007年

7 丁玉俊;意志以外原因騙保未能構(gòu)成犯罪未遂[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2007年

8 時軍;盜竊犯罪未遂形態(tài)探析[N];人民法院報(bào);2001年

9 鞠慶豐;犯罪未遂還是中止？[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2006年

10 韓強(qiáng) 彭艷;試論毒品犯罪未遂的特征[N];人民法院報(bào);2000年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 蘇宏峰;犯罪未遂基本問題研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 尤潤文;構(gòu)建教唆犯依犯罪未遂論處的新路徑[D];中國社會科學(xué)院研究生院;2015年

2 周浩;生產(chǎn)、銷售偽劣產(chǎn)品罪的刑法規(guī)制研究[D];遼寧大學(xué);2015年

3 張嘉福;論犯罪未遂的處罰根據(jù)[D];吉林大學(xué);2016年

4 海偉;犯罪未遂若干問題研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2006年

5 李辰;犯罪未遂研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2002年

6 張有勝;犯罪未遂理論比較研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2003年

7 叢倩;淺論犯罪未遂[D];中國政法大學(xué);2004年

8 吳鶯燕;論數(shù)額犯的犯罪未遂[D];安徽大學(xué);2007年

9 易陽;我國犯罪未遂理論若干問題研究[D];蘭州大學(xué);2008年

10 楊純翠;論犯罪未遂[D];安徽大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號：1342731