本文選題：《刑法》第306條　切入點(diǎn)：爭議問題　出處：《重慶大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：作為1997年刑法典的新增條款之一，刑法第306條從設(shè)立之時(shí)起，直至十幾年之后的今天，圍繞該條的爭議便從未平息，主張廢除該條的聲音也不曾減弱。尤其是近年來發(fā)生的李莊案與廣西“北海律師被抓事件”（四名律師因涉嫌觸犯刑法第306條被捕），讓刑法第306條再次進(jìn)入公眾的視線，法律適用與司法實(shí)踐中所暴露出來的問題亟待解決。本文以分析有關(guān)刑法第306條的爭議焦點(diǎn)為切入點(diǎn)，否定了主廢論者的觀點(diǎn)、明確了刑法第306條與相鄰法條的適用范圍界限、澄清了刑法第306條實(shí)施以來的司法現(xiàn)狀，指出應(yīng)當(dāng)從刑事實(shí)體法與刑事程序法相結(jié)合的角度對(duì)法條的具體內(nèi)容進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)性、全面性的理解，并提出了關(guān)于完善追究本罪刑事責(zé)任的特別司法處理程序的具體建議。 本文共分為四個(gè)部分。第一部分從闡述刑法第306條的立法背景入手，指出了刑法第306條罪名的由來以及增設(shè)該法條的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義，緊接著指出了刑法第306條施行后所出現(xiàn)的理論與實(shí)踐方面的問題。 第二部分從宏觀的角度對(duì)有關(guān)刑法第306條的爭議焦點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了分析，在對(duì)主廢論者的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行反駁的基礎(chǔ)上，進(jìn)一步明確了刑法第306條與第305條、307條的界定與區(qū)分，并以一定的數(shù)據(jù)和資料澄清了有關(guān)刑法第306條司法現(xiàn)狀的爭議，論述了刑法第306條存在的合理性與必要性。 第三部分，結(jié)合國內(nèi)學(xué)者對(duì)本罪的行為對(duì)象、行為方式、成立標(biāo)準(zhǔn)等方面的觀點(diǎn)，以對(duì)刑法進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)性、全面性的解釋為指導(dǎo)原則，對(duì)法律條文的具體含義進(jìn)行了正確的理解，對(duì)本罪的成立標(biāo)準(zhǔn)予以闡釋，重新申明了本罪是行為犯而不是結(jié)果犯。 第四部分，從司法實(shí)踐的角度，，一方面指出了對(duì)與刑法第306條有關(guān)的錯(cuò)案進(jìn)行追究的舉措，另一方面立足于防止刑法第306條被濫用的角度提出了保證刑法第306條正確實(shí)施的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)及相應(yīng)的程序措施。
[Abstract]:As one of the new articles in the Criminal Code of 1997, article 306 of the Criminal Code has never died down from the time of its establishment until today, more than a decade later. In particular, the Li Zhuang case in recent years and the "arrest of lawyers in Beihai" in Guangxi (four lawyers arrested on suspicion of violating Article 306 of the Criminal Law) allowed Article 306 of the Criminal Law to enter the public eye again. The application of the law and the problems exposed in the judicial practice should be solved urgently. This paper, based on the analysis of the dispute focus of Article 306 of the Criminal Law, negates the viewpoint of the principal abrogate, and clarifies the limits of the application of Article 306 of the Criminal Law and the adjacent articles of the Criminal Law. This paper clarifies the judicial status since the implementation of Article 306 of the Criminal Law, and points out that the concrete content of the article should be systematically and comprehensively understood from the angle of the combination of the criminal substantive law and the criminal procedure law. It also puts forward some specific suggestions on how to perfect the special judicial procedure for investigating the criminal responsibility of this crime. This article is divided into four parts. The first part begins with the legislative background of article 306 of criminal law, points out the origin of the crime of article 306 of criminal law and the practical significance of adding this article. Then it points out the problems in theory and practice after the implementation of Article 306 of Criminal Law. The second part analyzes the controversy focus of article 306 of criminal law from the macroscopic angle, and further clarifies the definition and distinction between article 306 and article 305 of criminal law on the basis of refuting the views of the principal abolitionist. With certain data and data, the author clarifies the dispute about the judicial status of Article 306 of the Criminal Law, and discusses the rationality and necessity of the existence of Article 306 of the Criminal Law. The third part, combined with the domestic scholars' views on the behavior object, behavior mode, establishment standard and so on, take the systematic and comprehensive interpretation of the criminal law as the guiding principle. This paper correctly understands the specific meaning of the legal provisions, explains the standard of the establishment of the crime, and restates that the crime is an act crime rather than a result crime. The fourth part, from the angle of judicial practice, on the one hand, points out the measures to investigate the wrong cases related to Article 306 of the Criminal Law. On the other hand, it puts forward the standard of proof and corresponding procedural measures to ensure the correct implementation of Article 306 of Criminal Law from the point of view of preventing the abuse of Article 306 of Criminal Law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：重慶大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D924.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 張玉鑲;門金玲;;刑法第306條的理性解讀[J];河北法學(xué);2007年02期

2 李蘭英;孫杰;何霓;;刑法第306條存與廢:傾聽法律職業(yè)人的聲音[J];河北法學(xué);2011年10期

3 傅建平;;刑法謙抑性的理論根基與價(jià)值[J];華東刑事司法評(píng)論;2003年03期

4 陳忠林;;無關(guān)存廢 重在理解[J];民主與法制;2011年05期

5 ;30位人大代表提出議案:取消《刑法》第306條[J];中國律師;2000年05期

6 鄭金火;“律師偽證罪”與刑事辯護(hù)[J];中國律師;2001年02期

本文編號(hào)：1688972