本文選題：緊急避險(xiǎn)　切入點(diǎn)：特定責(zé)任人　出處：《蘇州大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：緊急避險(xiǎn)作為一項(xiàng)古老的法律制度，其概念和內(nèi)容得到了不斷的深化與發(fā)展，保護(hù)的范圍不僅從利益擴(kuò)展到權(quán)益，而且當(dāng)保護(hù)權(quán)益與損害權(quán)益相等時(shí)也逐步得到了認(rèn)可，但過(guò)往對(duì)于緊急避險(xiǎn)的適用主體很少得到論述。我國(guó)刑法法條將職務(wù)上、業(yè)務(wù)上負(fù)有特定責(zé)任的人排除適用緊急避險(xiǎn)。首先，職務(wù)上、業(yè)務(wù)上的這種定義涵蓋面相對(duì)較窄，不符合法條定義的概括性；其次，特定責(zé)任人應(yīng)該是有相對(duì)的冒險(xiǎn)義務(wù)而不是絕對(duì)的危險(xiǎn)承擔(dān)義務(wù)，所以在特殊情形下特定責(zé)任人也有適用的必要。自招危險(xiǎn)在適用緊急避險(xiǎn)時(shí)法條并沒(méi)有任何規(guī)定，但由于存在無(wú)辜第三人的權(quán)益受損，這種特殊的危險(xiǎn)來(lái)源適用緊急避險(xiǎn)時(shí)理應(yīng)得到一定的限制。在承認(rèn)所有的避險(xiǎn)行為的基礎(chǔ)上，從行為發(fā)生的整體角度來(lái)分析自招危險(xiǎn)與緊急避險(xiǎn)的關(guān)系。對(duì)緊急避險(xiǎn)中無(wú)辜第三人的反擊行為性質(zhì)的定性，既應(yīng)當(dāng)考慮社會(huì)的整體權(quán)益，也應(yīng)考慮到無(wú)辜第三人的權(quán)益問(wèn)題，應(yīng)立足于公民合法權(quán)益不可侵犯的出發(fā)點(diǎn)，，以無(wú)辜第三人的視角來(lái)看待反擊行為，給反擊行為定性。
[Abstract]:As an ancient legal system, the concept and content of emergency risk avoidance have been continuously deepened and developed. The scope of protection is not only extended from interests to rights and interests, but also gradually recognized when the protection of rights and interests is equal to damage rights and interests.However, in the past, the subject of emergency risk avoidance has rarely been discussed.The criminal law of our country excludes the application of emergency risk-aversion to the person who has special duty in duty and business.First, in terms of function, the definition of business is relatively narrow and does not conform to the generality of the definition of the law; secondly, the particular person responsible should have a relative obligation to take risks rather than an absolute obligation to take risks.Therefore, under special circumstances, the specific responsible person also has the necessity to apply.There is no stipulation in applying the law of emergency risk avoidance, but due to the damage of the rights and interests of innocent third party, this special source of danger should be limited when it is applied to emergency risk avoidance.Based on the recognition of all risk-averse behaviors, the relationship between self-admission risk and emergency risk avoidance is analyzed from the overall point of view of behavior occurrence.The characterization of the nature of the counterattack behavior of innocent third parties in emergency safe havens should take into account both the overall rights and interests of society and the rights and interests of innocent third parties, and should be based on the inviolable starting point of the legitimate rights and interests of citizens,Look at counterattack behavior from the perspective of innocent third person, and characterize counterattack behavior.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D924.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 胡嘉金;王昭振;;論緊急避險(xiǎn)中“自招危險(xiǎn)”的理論詮釋及內(nèi)在價(jià)值構(gòu)造——以作為義務(wù)為視角[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2007年03期

2 喬青;;特定責(zé)任人的緊急避險(xiǎn)權(quán)——基于上�！�7·17”特大火災(zāi)的思考[J];河南司法警官職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年02期

3 陳凌;;論自招危險(xiǎn)中的緊急避險(xiǎn)[J];今日南國(guó)(理論創(chuàng)新版);2009年08期

4 陳璇;;自招危險(xiǎn)情形下的緊急避險(xiǎn)問(wèn)題研究[J];江西公安專(zhuān)科學(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2007年01期

5 劉明祥;論緊急避險(xiǎn)的性質(zhì)[J];法學(xué)研究;1997年04期

6 黎宏;;緊急避險(xiǎn)法律性質(zhì)研究[J];清華法學(xué);2007年01期

7 黎宏;;論正當(dāng)防衛(wèi)與緊急避險(xiǎn)的界限[J];人民檢察;2006年11期

8 李佳麗;;自招危險(xiǎn)的緊急避險(xiǎn)[J];天津市經(jīng)理學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年06期

9 張明楷;;論偶然防衛(wèi)[J];清華法學(xué);2012年01期

10 王鋼;;緊急避險(xiǎn)中無(wú)辜第三人的容忍義務(wù)及其限度兼論緊急避險(xiǎn)的正當(dāng)化根據(jù)[J];中外法學(xué);2011年03期

本文編號(hào)：1691312