本文選題：轉化型搶劫罪　切入點：當場　出處：《湖南師范大學》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：大陸學界普遍將我國《刑法》第269條的規(guī)定稱為轉化型搶劫罪。由于立法本身所固有的高度抽象性不可能一一對應實踐中的具體情形,加之司法主體對法律條文的理解不盡相同,學界和實務界對于此罪的認定存在著比較大的爭議,其中對“當場”的認定問題可謂是眾說紛紜,莫衷一是。本文的研究目的就是為了厘清“當場”的認定問題,站在學界和實務界的肩膀上,整理前人的研究成果,總結存在問題,并在此基礎上進行更全面和清晰的整合,以求完善我國轉化型搶劫罪中“當場”的認定。 在此過程中,本文運用文獻研究法、歷史調查法、個案分析法、對比分析法等研究方法,擬就“當場”認定的分歧進行分析探討。在總結學界相關理論及考察國內外相關規(guī)定的基礎上,通過對轉化型搶劫罪規(guī)定的歷史沿革追溯,筆者能夠較為清晰地展現(xiàn)出當前立法關于“當場”規(guī)定存在的問題,即立法解釋的缺位和由此造成的司法混亂,并對此問題進行反思。相對應的,筆者認為應該從兩個方面進行完善,即立法上要完善解釋體系,在司法實踐層面的完善上更是要認識到“當場”作為轉化型搶劫罪的時空要件,考慮其是空間性概念與時間性概念的結合體,是盜竊、詐騙、搶奪等先行行為與暴力、威脅等后續(xù)行為的聯(lián)結點。這就要特別注意,在司法實踐的完善中,應充分從三個方面進行考慮：時空的接續(xù)性、先后行為的關聯(lián)性和追捕事態(tài)的繼續(xù)性。本文的論述,希望對提出立法建議和司法實踐的統(tǒng)一、明確有所裨益。
[Abstract]:The stipulation of Article 269 of the Criminal Law of China is generally referred to as the crime of transformational robbery. Because of the high degree of abstraction inherent in the legislation itself, it is impossible to correspond to the specific situation in practice one by one. In addition, the judicial subject's understanding of the legal provisions is not the same, the academic and practical circles of this crime there is a relatively large dispute, among which "on the spot" of the issue of identification is widely held. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the identification of "on the spot", stand on the shoulders of the academic and practical circles, sort out the previous research results, sum up the existing problems, and on this basis carry on a more comprehensive and clear integration. In order to perfect the confirmation of the crime of transforming robbery in our country. In this process, this paper uses literature research, historical investigation, case analysis, comparative analysis and other research methods. On the basis of summing up the relevant theories of academic circles and investigating the relevant provisions at home and abroad, the author traces the historical evolution of the provisions of transformational robbery by means of the analysis and discussion of the differences between the "spot" and "on the spot". The author can clearly show the problems existing in the current legislation about "on the spot", that is, the absence of legislative interpretation and the judicial confusion caused by it, and reflect on this problem. The author thinks that we should perfect it from two aspects, that is, to perfect the system of interpretation in legislation, and to realize that "on the spot" as the space-time element of the crime of transformed robbery in the judicial practice. Considering that it is a combination of the concept of space and the concept of time, it is the joint point of the following acts such as theft, fraud, robbery and other subsequent acts such as violence and threats. This should be paid special attention to, in the perfection of judicial practice. It should be considered from three aspects: the continuity of time and space, the relevance of successive acts and the continuation of the pursuit of the state of affairs. The discussion in this paper is expected to be of benefit to the unification of legislative proposals and judicial practice.
【學位授予單位】：湖南師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.3

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前9條

1 羅翔;論轉化型搶劫罪[J];北京市政法管理干部學院學報;2001年02期

2 宋華,陳從治;海峽兩岸轉化型搶劫罪之比較[J];江蘇省社會主義學院學報;2001年01期

3 金澤剛;論轉化犯的構成及立法例分析[J];山東法學;1998年04期

4 王俊平;轉化犯及相關立法研究[J];河南省政法管理干部學院學報;2002年01期

5 吳大華;盜竊轉化犯問題研析[J];云南法學;1999年02期

6 陳興良;;轉化犯與包容犯:兩種立法例之比較[J];中國法學;1993年04期

7 劉明祥;事后搶劫問題比較研究[J];中國刑事法雜志;2001年03期

8 沈志民,高曉春;論我國刑法中的非典型搶劫罪[J];國家檢察官學院學報;2003年06期

9 肖中;論轉化犯[J];浙江社會科學;2000年03期

，

本文編號：1595875