本文關(guān)鍵詞： 二次性評(píng)價(jià) 前置法 違法性 復(fù)合量刑　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理是一整套評(píng)價(jià)體系。定罪上，行為需要先經(jīng)過(guò)刑法之外的前置法進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)，而后進(jìn)入刑法視野進(jìn)行是否入罪的評(píng)價(jià)；量刑上，采取二次復(fù)合量刑方法。該原理重視對(duì)前置法的尋找，認(rèn)識(shí)到刑法本身的不足，注重刑法與其他部門(mén)法銜接過(guò)程中刑法的被動(dòng)性。 一次性評(píng)價(jià)存的籠統(tǒng)、模糊和不足，與公私法相融合的趨勢(shì)相悖，，其實(shí)質(zhì)是入罪評(píng)價(jià)。正因?yàn)橐淮涡栽u(píng)價(jià)的不足，需要運(yùn)用刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理。為了證實(shí)刑法二次性原理的必要性，除了一次性評(píng)價(jià)的不足外，對(duì)刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理的適用范圍進(jìn)行了辨析，刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理并不單純適用于法定犯，對(duì)于傳統(tǒng)自然犯同樣適用；不僅適用于現(xiàn)在存在的犯罪類型，對(duì)于新型犯罪同樣適用。 刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理從法理基礎(chǔ)上來(lái)說(shuō)，與中外很多法學(xué)理論有繼承和移植關(guān)系�？v向上，該理論與“出禮入刑”有繼承關(guān)系，“出禮入刑”對(duì)于禮與法的經(jīng)典論述，對(duì)于刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理的出于他法入于刑法有異曲同工之妙；橫向上，對(duì)英美法系“限權(quán)思想”，大陸法系“可罰的違法性理論”、“刑法的規(guī)范主義”等有所移植和借鑒。刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理強(qiáng)調(diào)刑法的被動(dòng)性，限制刑罰的使用。刑法作為社會(huì)規(guī)范中最為嚴(yán)格的一種規(guī)范，是司法機(jī)關(guān)代表國(guó)家行使刑罰權(quán)的體現(xiàn)，對(duì)國(guó)家權(quán)力的限制要求慎用刑罰權(quán)，而這與刑法的被動(dòng)適用相吻合；刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理認(rèn)為行為之所以可以認(rèn)定為犯罪，是因?yàn)樵撔袨樵谛谭ㄖ獾那爸梅ㄖ斜辉u(píng)價(jià)為違法，并且這種違法超過(guò)了前置法的評(píng)價(jià)范圍，進(jìn)入刑法，具有刑法上的二次違法性；刑法的規(guī)范主義同樣提到了行為被認(rèn)定為犯罪，是行為觸犯了刑事法律之外的“行為法”，與刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理堅(jiān)持對(duì)前置法的尋找是共通的。 刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理對(duì)立法的指導(dǎo)在于以尋找、尊重前置法為起點(diǎn)，否定以刑法倒逼前置法制定的立法、修法模式。對(duì)司法的指導(dǎo)在于定罪上堅(jiān)持行為的二次違法性，以“出罪”的評(píng)價(jià)心理審慎定罪；量刑上充分考慮人身危險(xiǎn)性，做到個(gè)性化復(fù)合量刑。 最后，刑法二次性評(píng)價(jià)原理對(duì)法律制度進(jìn)行重構(gòu)。搭建法與道德的關(guān)系，搭建刑法與前置法的關(guān)系。質(zhì)疑“先刑后民”的做法是一種偽原理，存在諸多缺陷。并對(duì)刑民交叉領(lǐng)域的適法提出建議，民法能夠充分評(píng)價(jià)的，只民不刑；刑民并列關(guān)系的，刑民并行；刑民關(guān)系為包含關(guān)系的，先民后刑。經(jīng)過(guò)對(duì)刑事附帶民事制度的質(zhì)疑，最后建議廢止刑事附帶民事訴訟制度。
[Abstract]:The principle of secondary evaluation of criminal law is a set of evaluation system. In the conviction, the behavior needs to be evaluated first by the pre-law outside the criminal law, then into the perspective of the criminal law to evaluate whether the crime is criminalized or not. In sentencing, the second compound sentencing method is adopted. This principle attaches importance to the search for the front law, recognizes the shortcomings of the criminal law itself, and pays attention to the passivity of the criminal law in the process of linking the criminal law with other branches of law. The existence of one-off evaluation is general, vague and insufficient, which is contrary to the trend of the combination of public and private law, and its essence is the evaluation of incrimination, which is precisely due to the deficiency of one-time evaluation. In order to prove the necessity of the principle of secondary nature of criminal law, besides the deficiency of one-time evaluation, the application scope of the principle of secondary evaluation of criminal law is analyzed. The principle of secondary evaluation of criminal law is not only applicable to statutory crime, but also to traditional natural crime. Not only for the existing types of crime, but also for new types of crime. The theory of secondary evaluation of criminal law has inherited and transplanted relationship with many Chinese and foreign legal theories on the basis of jurisprudence. Vertically, this theory has inheritance relationship with "courteous punishment". The classic argumentation of "out of ceremony into punishment" for ritual and law, for the second evaluation of the principle of criminal law out of other laws into the criminal law has the same work in the same way; Horizontally, it is transplanted and used for reference to the idea of "limitation of power" in common law system, "the theory of punishable illegality" in continental law system, and "normalism of criminal law". The second evaluation principle of criminal law emphasizes the passivity of criminal law. As one of the most strict norms in the social norms, criminal law is the embodiment of the judicial organs to exercise the right of punishment on behalf of the state, and the restriction of the state power requires careful use of the right of punishment. This is consistent with the passive application of criminal law; The principle of secondary evaluation of criminal law thinks that the behavior can be regarded as a crime because the act is evaluated as illegal in the front law outside the criminal law, and this illegal law exceeds the scope of the evaluation of the former law and enters into the criminal law. It has the second illegal character in criminal law; The normalism of criminal law also mentions that the behavior is considered as a crime, and it is the behavior law that violates the criminal law. It is common with the principle of the second evaluation of criminal law to insist on the search for the former law. The guidance of the second evaluation principle of criminal law to the legislation is to seek and respect the former law as the starting point and negate the legislation made by the criminal law. The guidance to the judicature lies in the second illegality of the behavior in the conviction, and the careful conviction with the evaluation of "crime"; In sentencing, personal dangerousness should be fully taken into account, and individualized compound sentencing should be achieved. Finally, the principle of secondary evaluation of criminal law reconstructs the legal system. The relationship between law and morality, and the relationship between criminal law and preposition law. It is a false principle to question the practice of "first sentence before the people". There are many defects. And the appropriate law in the field of criminal law and civil law can be fully evaluated, only the people do not punish; Where the criminal and the civilian are juxtaposed, the criminal and the civilian are parallel; After questioning the criminal incidental civil system, the author proposes to abolish the criminal incidental civil procedure system.
【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)】：D924

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 謝玉童;對(duì)量刑原則的再思考[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1997年02期

2 楊興培;論刑事法律關(guān)系[J];法學(xué);1998年02期

3 歐陽(yáng)本祺;;對(duì)非法經(jīng)營(yíng)罪兜底性規(guī)定的實(shí)證分析[J];法學(xué);2012年07期

4 劉憲權(quán);;中國(guó)(上海)自由貿(mào)易試驗(yàn)區(qū)成立對(duì)刑法適用之影響[J];法學(xué);2013年12期

5 孫振慶;汪忠玲;胡琳琳;;“禁止令”制度的價(jià)值與有效運(yùn)行途徑之探究[J];山東審判;2011年05期

本文編號(hào)：1465392