本文關(guān)鍵詞： 犯罪預(yù)備 立法不足 化解思路　出處：《吉首大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：對于犯罪預(yù)備行為的研究，每個(gè)國家根據(jù)本國國情及傳統(tǒng)文化、法律價(jià)值來制定完善的犯罪理論，犯罪預(yù)備是故意犯罪過程的一種，從古至今均有學(xué)者在不斷的研究與探討。我國《刑法》第22條規(guī)定：“為了犯罪，準(zhǔn)備工具、制造條件的，是犯罪預(yù)備�！薄皩τ陬A(yù)備犯，可以比照既遂犯從輕、減輕處罰或者免除處罰�！蔽覈捎玫牧⒎Ｊ绞墙梃b了前蘇聯(lián)及東歐一些國家的模式，該種立法模式以犯罪預(yù)備的概念和預(yù)備犯的處罰原則為內(nèi)容，縱觀我國的犯罪預(yù)備概念，在刑法學(xué)界，一直沒有一個(gè)通說，總則概括式的模式不僅僅是立法上的缺陷也給司法實(shí)踐中帶來很多麻煩，比如司法資源的浪費(fèi)等問題。研究我國犯罪預(yù)備立法存在的問題，探討其出現(xiàn)問題的原因，查看國外有關(guān)犯罪預(yù)備的立法規(guī)定，結(jié)合我國國情及實(shí)際情況，提出化解思路及建議。對于我國刑事上不作區(qū)分，原則上處罰犯罪預(yù)備行為的立法規(guī)定已經(jīng)不適應(yīng)司法實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)的各種復(fù)雜情形。我國立法如何規(guī)定犯罪預(yù)備行為，不僅僅是制度設(shè)計(jì)問題，更是在社會法治大環(huán)境下對法律價(jià)值的認(rèn)識問題，針對我國犯罪預(yù)備出現(xiàn)的問題，本文中提出兩點(diǎn)化解思路及建議，在分析出現(xiàn)問題及原因的基礎(chǔ)上，提出化解問題的兩點(diǎn)對策:在充分借鑒國外關(guān)于對預(yù)備行為立法規(guī)定，結(jié)合我國國情及我國的立法原則，，對犯罪預(yù)備行為重新建構(gòu)，在司法改革的情況下，針對犯罪預(yù)備立法存在的問題，找出存在問題的原因，比如立法經(jīng)驗(yàn)的不足，立法觀念有偏差、理論研究相對薄弱、立法技術(shù)不成熟、傳統(tǒng)法律文化和立法價(jià)值的影響。本文主要談到立法規(guī)定中的問題，如我國刑法犯罪預(yù)備立法規(guī)定與罪刑法定原則相違背、與刑法輕緩化相左且與犯罪中止和未遂形態(tài)劃分的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不統(tǒng)一、易造成司法機(jī)關(guān)濫用刑罰權(quán)、使刑事司法機(jī)關(guān)陷入兩難境地。本文建議以兩點(diǎn)思路修正預(yù)備立法：完善預(yù)備形態(tài)立法或廢除預(yù)備形態(tài)。完善法，宜將犯罪未完成形態(tài)劃分為預(yù)備形態(tài)與實(shí)行形態(tài)，將中止或未遂情形納入預(yù)備形態(tài)和實(shí)行形態(tài)。并推行“兩個(gè)延續(xù)”和“三個(gè)補(bǔ)充”。取消犯罪預(yù)備形態(tài)，應(yīng)將預(yù)備行為植入中止形態(tài)或未遂形態(tài)中，提高預(yù)備或準(zhǔn)備階段危害行為的入罪和刑罰處罰門坎。并針對現(xiàn)有的問題之處，比較兩種思路的異同，建議采用兩種思路中更好的一種思路。
[Abstract]:For the study of crime preparation, each country formulates a perfect crime theory according to its national conditions, traditional culture and legal value. Crime preparation is a kind of intentional crime process. Article 22 of the Criminal Law of our country stipulates that "for the purpose of committing a crime, preparing tools and creating conditions, the preparation for a crime is preparation for a crime." Mitigation of punishment or exemption of punishment. "the legislative model adopted in our country is based on the model of the former Soviet Union and some countries in Eastern Europe. The legislative model takes the concept of crime preparation and the principle of punishment of the preparatory offender as the content, and makes a general survey of the concept of crime preparation in our country. In the field of criminal law, there has been no general theory that the general principle is not only flawed in legislation, but also brings a lot of problems in judicial practice, such as the waste of judicial resources. This paper discusses the causes of the problems, looks at the legislative provisions on crime preparation in foreign countries, combines the national conditions and actual conditions of our country, and puts forward some ideas and suggestions on how to resolve the problems. It does not distinguish between the two countries in criminal matters. In principle, the legislative provisions that penalize the crime preparation act have not adapted to various complicated situations in the judicial practice. How to stipulate the crime preparation act in our country's legislation is not only a matter of system design. In view of the problems in the preparation for crime in our country, this paper puts forward two ideas and suggestions to resolve the problems, and on the basis of analyzing the problems and causes, Two countermeasures to solve the problem are put forward: under the circumstance of judicial reform, the author puts forward two countermeasures to solve the problem: drawing lessons from the foreign legislative provisions on preparatory acts, combining with the national conditions of our country and the legislative principles of our country, reconstructing the criminal preparatory acts, and reforming the judicature. In view of the problems existing in the preparation of crime legislation, we should find out the reasons for the problems, such as the lack of legislative experience, the deviation of legislative concepts, the relatively weak theoretical research, the immature legislative techniques, The influence of the traditional legal culture and the legislative value. This paper mainly discusses the problems in the legislative provisions, such as the violation of the principle of the legality of the crime in the criminal law of our country. Different from the criminal law and the standard of criminal suspension and attempted form, it is easy for the judiciary to abuse the right of punishment. This paper suggests that the preparatory legislation should be amended in two ways: to perfect the legislation of preparatory form or to abolish the preparatory form, and to perfect the law, which should be divided into the form of preparation and the form of practice. The suspension or attempt shall be incorporated into the form of preparation and practice... and "two continuations" and "three complements" shall be carried out... the cancellation of the form of preparation for the commission of a crime shall include the preparation of the act in the form of suspension or attempt, In view of the existing problems, comparing the similarities and differences between the two ideas, it is suggested to adopt a better way of thinking.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉首大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 周光權(quán);行為無價(jià)值論之提倡[J];比較法研究;2003年05期

2 張明楷;犯罪預(yù)備中的“為了犯罪”[J];法學(xué)雜志;1998年01期

3 曾粵興,張勇;刑罰權(quán)發(fā)動(dòng)的合理性——人大代表增設(shè)拖欠工資罪議案的思考[J];中國人民公安大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2005年04期

4 郝守才;論犯罪預(yù)備立法之完善[J];河南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2002年06期

5 張玲;高長富;;我國犯罪預(yù)備立法存在的不足與化解思路[J];湖北警官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2013年12期

6 舒洪水;許健;;預(yù)備犯的處罰根據(jù)[J];云南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(法學(xué)版);2011年01期

7 梁根林;;預(yù)備犯普遍處罰原則的困境與突圍——《刑法》第22條的解讀與重構(gòu)[J];中國法學(xué);2011年02期

8 王志祥,郭健;論犯罪預(yù)備行為的處罰范圍[J];政治與法律;2005年02期

9 高格;刑法思想與刑法修改完善[J];中央檢察官管理學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1994年04期

10 肖介清;論預(yù)備犯的種類[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1997年03期

本文編號：1534273