本文選題：尋釁滋事　切入點(diǎn)：客觀行為　出處：《遼寧大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：尋釁滋事罪在實(shí)踐中為多發(fā)罪名，同時(shí)也是理論界和實(shí)踐中存在爭(zhēng)議較多的罪名，由于案件的多發(fā)，準(zhǔn)確地界定此罪，將有助于司法實(shí)踐中的認(rèn)定。通常情況下，我們?cè)趯め呑淌伦锏恼J(rèn)定上，主要有下面四個(gè)問題：第一，尋釁滋事罪規(guī)定了四種情形，每一種情形本質(zhì)的認(rèn)定問題。每一種情形本質(zhì)的認(rèn)定，直接關(guān)系尋釁滋事罪的成立與否以及此罪與他罪的界分，對(duì)這一問題的研究，至關(guān)重要。第二，除了尋釁滋事罪四種情形的本質(zhì)認(rèn)定問題外，每一種情形后都附有情節(jié)方面的規(guī)定，但對(duì)情節(jié)的限度內(nèi)容卻沒有做出具體規(guī)定，也無相應(yīng)的司法解釋，造成實(shí)踐中認(rèn)定的混亂，亟待我們的解決。第三，實(shí)踐中存在的本罪與他罪的界分難題，在刑法分則中，許多其他犯罪的客觀情形都與本罪完全相同或類似，，導(dǎo)致實(shí)踐中常發(fā)生同案不同判的情形，嚴(yán)重影響了我國(guó)司法的統(tǒng)一和權(quán)威。第四，關(guān)于尋釁滋事罪的第四種情形中的“公共場(chǎng)所”的認(rèn)定，理論界基本不存在爭(zhēng)議，但對(duì)于“網(wǎng)絡(luò)空間”起哄鬧事的情況是否屬于尋釁滋事罪尚存在一定爭(zhēng)論，隨著兩高于2013年9月一項(xiàng)司法解釋的出臺(tái)，此后的“網(wǎng)絡(luò)”起哄鬧事案，一律以尋釁滋事罪定罪處罰，這一司法解釋的出臺(tái)，解決了現(xiàn)有實(shí)踐中多發(fā)的網(wǎng)絡(luò)尋釁案件，是我國(guó)司法進(jìn)程中的一大進(jìn)步。筆者在文章的第四部分列舉了一起網(wǎng)絡(luò)起哄鬧事的典型案列，詳盡地闡明了該項(xiàng)司法解釋的內(nèi)容，以期望對(duì)我國(guó)的司法實(shí)踐有所幫助�；谝陨蠁栴}的存在，筆者找尋了實(shí)踐中發(fā)生的尋釁滋事罪與其他罪較難區(qū)分的典型疑難案例，對(duì)尋釁滋事罪四種客觀情形的本質(zhì)內(nèi)含進(jìn)行了分析理解，對(duì)影響本罪認(rèn)定的犯罪主觀要件和客觀要件的疑難問題進(jìn)行了重點(diǎn)解析，最后結(jié)合案例，對(duì)尋釁滋事罪與其他犯罪進(jìn)行了準(zhǔn)確的界分。筆者通過對(duì)尋釁滋事罪各個(gè)方面的準(zhǔn)確界定，以期解決其實(shí)踐中存在的各項(xiàng)疑難，進(jìn)而對(duì)我國(guó)的司法實(shí)踐盡自己的一點(diǎn)綿薄之力，希望對(duì)司法實(shí)踐的認(rèn)定有所幫助。
[Abstract]:The crime of provoking and causing trouble is a multiple crime in practice, and it is also a controversial crime in theory and practice. Due to the multiplicity of cases, the accurate definition of this crime will be helpful to the determination of the crime in judicial practice. In the determination of the crime of provoking and causing trouble, we mainly have the following four problems: first, the crime of provoking and causing trouble stipulates four situations, the nature of each case, the nature of each situation, and the nature of each situation. It is of great importance to study this issue directly whether or not the crime of provoking and causing trouble is established or not, and whether this crime is divided into other crimes. Secondly, besides the essential determination of the four circumstances of the crime of provoking and causing trouble, In each case, there are provisions on the circumstances, but there are no specific provisions on the content of the limit of the circumstances, and there is no corresponding judicial interpretation, resulting in confusion in practice, which is urgently to be resolved by us. Third, In criminal law, the objective situation of many other crimes is exactly the same or similar to this crime, which often leads to different judgments of the same cases in practice. It has seriously affected the unity and authority of our country's judicature. 4th, regarding the determination of "public places" in the 4th cases of the crime of provoking and causing trouble, there is basically no dispute in the theoretical circle. However, there is still some controversy as to whether the "cyberspace" hooting is a crime of provocation and disturbance. With the introduction of two judicial interpretations higher than September 1st 2013, the subsequent "cyber" hooting cases, All of them were convicted and punished for the crime of provoking and causing trouble. With the introduction of this judicial interpretation, the frequent cases of online provocation in existing practice have been resolved. It is a great progress in the judicial process of our country. In the 4th part of the article, the author enumerates a typical case list of online hooting, and expounds the content of the judicial interpretation in detail. Based on the existence of the above problems, the author looks for typical difficult cases in which the crime of causing trouble and causing trouble is difficult to distinguish from other crimes in practice. This paper analyzes and understands the essence of the four objective circumstances of the crime of provoking and causing trouble, analyzes the difficult and difficult problems affecting the subjective and objective elements of the crime, and finally combines the case, Through the accurate definition of all aspects of the crime of provoking and causing trouble, the author hopes to solve the problems existing in his practice, and then to do his part in the judicial practice of our country. I hope it will be helpful to the judicial practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D924.36

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

中國(guó)期刊全文數(shù)據(jù)庫 前7條

1 宋峰,曹紅衛(wèi);試論尋釁滋事犯罪的司法認(rèn)定[J];北京人民警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年04期

2 周軍;將尋釁滋事罪分解的可行性探究[J];天津市政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年03期

3 蔣華;;尋釁滋事犯罪中的幾個(gè)問題探討[J];天津市政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年S1期

4 何慶仁;尋釁滋事罪研究[J];中國(guó)刑事法雜志;2003年04期

5 謝錫美,張志軍;尋釁滋事罪與搶劫罪之界限探析[J];政治與法律;2004年01期

6 杜啟新,安文錄;論尋釁滋事罪的合理定位[J];政治與法律;2004年02期

7 張明楷;;尋釁滋事罪探究(下篇)[J];政治與法律;2008年02期

本文編號(hào)：1622187