本文選題：法定犯　切入點：自然犯　出處：《西南財經(jīng)大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：法定犯是研究經(jīng)濟刑法學(xué)的基礎(chǔ)理論問題。法定犯的概念,其最初由加羅法洛從犯罪學(xué)角度提出,加羅法洛的自然犯與法定犯理論對犯罪與犯罪人進(jìn)行了類型劃分,這一理論被后世引入刑法學(xué)中。然而以后的刑法學(xué)研究往往忽視加羅法洛的立場,加之行政犯概念在德國的產(chǎn)生和發(fā)展,使得法定犯,行政犯問題的研究出現(xiàn)一種混沌的現(xiàn)象。行政犯,法定犯到底為何,德、日理論爭議不斷,并未形成統(tǒng)一的看法。我國刑法理理論深受德、日理論影響,在沒有深入考究的基礎(chǔ)上,我國通說理論認(rèn)為行政犯與法定犯等同,這是一種理論上的誤區(qū)。 本文在梳理國內(nèi)外關(guān)于法定犯產(chǎn)生、發(fā)展的已有文獻(xiàn)基礎(chǔ)上,就法定犯的定義、特征和價值進(jìn)行深入分析。在此基礎(chǔ)上進(jìn)一步研究法定犯的刑法立法和刑法適用問題,并對各部分的現(xiàn)狀和存在的問題進(jìn)行研究,提出可行性的建議。為此,本文主要從三個方面進(jìn)行研究。 第一部分是基礎(chǔ)理論問題。首先,需要明確法定犯的內(nèi)涵。一是在目前理論界對法定犯的定義基礎(chǔ)上,明確其內(nèi)涵和所指：法定犯是違反“一次法”與“二次法”的犯罪行為。對法定犯的產(chǎn)生和發(fā)展進(jìn)行分析,明確法定犯的內(nèi)涵已經(jīng)發(fā)生變化,我們今天所講的法定犯是在刑法學(xué)的意義上而言的,這與加羅法洛最初從犯罪學(xué)立場出發(fā)提出自然犯與法定犯的概念和目的已經(jīng)不同,這是本文研究法定犯問題的基本立場和出發(fā)點。二是對自然犯與法定犯進(jìn)行比較。在與自然犯的比較中,明確自然犯的“普常性”,即依據(jù)倫理道德就可對自然犯的危害性作出判斷。而法定犯的特征是具有“超常性”,不能依據(jù)倫理道德來對其危害作出準(zhǔn)確的判斷,需要將其與法的禁止性規(guī)定結(jié)合起來才可準(zhǔn)確認(rèn)定。三是法定犯罪與行政犯罪相比,兩個有明顯的差異。針對我國理論界通說認(rèn)為法定犯與行政犯等同的觀點,本文在考究法定犯與行政犯的淵源基礎(chǔ)上,對二者的內(nèi)涵和外延進(jìn)行區(qū)分,明確二者的不同。在現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)定下,我國法定犯的內(nèi)涵和外延應(yīng)當(dāng)包括行政犯。其四,對目前的通說理論進(jìn)行評析,由于法定犯與行政犯在形式上具有一定的相似性,且我國理論深受日本行政犯學(xué)說的影響,這是形成法定犯等同于行政犯通說的具體原因。事實上,在內(nèi)涵和外延上的法定犯罪并不局限于行政犯罪的水平。 其次,法定犯與自然犯相比具有“超常性”,這種“超常性”主要表現(xiàn)為雙重違法性,特定的目的性,專業(yè)性和隱蔽性等。如果采用“普常性”的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)很難意識到法定犯的危害,采用“超常性”理念認(rèn)識法定犯的危害是一條事半功倍的進(jìn)路。法定犯罪還具有“相對性”,當(dāng)法定犯罪行為由于被人們所普遍接受和認(rèn)識到行為的危害性,深入人們的觀念中,那么就會發(fā)生法定犯向自然犯轉(zhuǎn)化的情形。 最后,解析法定犯理論價值。法定犯理論在犯罪學(xué)意義上可以解釋犯罪現(xiàn)象,這是其最初產(chǎn)生時的價值。在加羅法洛的理論中,法定犯罪并不是真正的犯罪,這類犯罪人也不是真正的犯罪人,所以,法定犯并不是刑法打擊的重點。法定犯理論的最初價值在于其明確了刑法打擊的重點,縮小了打擊的犯罪面。現(xiàn)在,在刑法中,法定犯罪的理論價值的科學(xué)意識,得到了發(fā)展。由于法定犯的特殊性,其與“一次法”規(guī)范聯(lián)系緊密,法定犯理論對刑事立法的影響突出地表現(xiàn)在對犯罪圈的擴張、縮小和刑罰適用方面。 第二部分是法定犯的刑法立法問題。首先,法定犯在立罪時是有選擇性的。法定犯立罪的選擇性需要以刑法的謙抑性理念為指導(dǎo),講究一種必要性。如果非刑罰方式可以實現(xiàn)目的,那就沒有必要使用嚴(yán)厲的懲罰。在法定犯立法中,如果對違反“一次法”規(guī)范的行為可以采用民事、行政等處罰措施可以達(dá)到預(yù)防目的和保護(hù)效果的話,這是沒有必要被規(guī)定為犯罪,除非違反法律的行為具有嚴(yán)重的社會危害性是動刑的必要性。受利益集團(tuán)的影響,法定犯的立罪容易被利益集團(tuán)所俘獲,從而制定出對利益集團(tuán)有利的規(guī)范,法定犯中有許多罪名都涉及到對利益集團(tuán)的保護(hù),在法定犯的立法中又不得不考慮這一層面。 其次,對德、日和英美國家的法定犯立法實踐進(jìn)行考察,分析利弊,借鑒域外立法實踐的有利經(jīng)驗。通過考察發(fā)現(xiàn),目前法定犯立法主要有三種形式,即刑法典形式,獨立形式和分散形式。而目前我國學(xué)者所推崇的是分散形式的立法。就目前立法而言,法定犯的罪狀多采用空白罪狀的形式予以表述,這決定了法定犯的罪狀內(nèi)容具有間接性,可塑性和易變性。 最后,評析法定犯的立法。針對我國采用刑法典形式統(tǒng)一規(guī)定犯罪與刑罰的現(xiàn)狀,在借鑒域外立法經(jīng)驗的基礎(chǔ)上,主張采用分散形式的立法模式,對法定犯進(jìn)行分類規(guī)定。兼顧入罪與處刑兩方面的內(nèi)容,避免刑法的過度干預(yù),適時調(diào)整犯罪圈的大小,預(yù)防犯罪擴大與非犯罪化并重發(fā)展。同時注意刑罰的輕緩化,改善重刑為主的刑罰適用體系。 第三部分是法定犯的刑法適用。首先是把握法定犯入罪的法律依據(jù)是何,鑒于法定犯的雙重違法性特點,在把握其入罪依據(jù)時,需要將“一次法”規(guī)范違法性與刑事違法性統(tǒng)一起來。違反“一次法”規(guī)范只是一般的違法行為,如果危害達(dá)到刑法所需的量,就具有刑事違法性。依據(jù)刑法規(guī)范來定量,使得違法行為從“一次法”違法上升到刑事違法,只有兼顧二者,才能準(zhǔn)確把握法定犯入罪的法依據(jù)。 其次,討論法定犯的解釋特點。由于法定犯違反的是法的禁止性規(guī)定,所以在對其進(jìn)行解釋時,必須依據(jù)現(xiàn)有法律規(guī)范進(jìn)行,堅持規(guī)范主義的立場。由于法定犯的倫理色彩較弱,本身具有專業(yè)性強、隱蔽性高的特點,在對其進(jìn)行解釋時,就要突破”三常“理論,立足于“一次法”規(guī)范的相關(guān)規(guī)定,以作出專業(yè)、精確的解釋。 第三,討論法定犯的違法性認(rèn)識問題。違法性認(rèn)識在法定犯問題中具有特殊的地位,直接反映處行為人的主觀惡性和對結(jié)果的心理態(tài)度。法定犯的行為人在違反“一次法”規(guī)范時是有,也有可能有違法性認(rèn)識的,這種認(rèn)識表現(xiàn)出了行為人的主觀惡,與主觀罪過聯(lián)系緊密。 第四,研究法定犯罪在主客觀相統(tǒng)一原則下的嚴(yán)格責(zé)任問題。嚴(yán)格責(zé)任不需要對行為人的主觀罪過進(jìn)行證明,主要是在公害犯罪中。我國刑法中是否存在嚴(yán)格責(zé)任,學(xué)界存有爭議。在法定犯中,大多涉及對公共秩序、環(huán)境、食品等公害犯罪的規(guī)定,這些公害犯罪在實踐中很難證明主觀罪過的存在,如果嚴(yán)格堅持主客觀相統(tǒng)一的原則,它將不可避免地導(dǎo)致放縱公害犯罪形勢。嚴(yán)格責(zé)任不是不要求主觀過錯,只是一個程序性考慮,并不需要證明這一點,并不違反主觀性與客觀性的統(tǒng)一的原則。 最后,對我國法定犯的刑法適用做—檢討。明確刑事違法與“一次法”違法行為的區(qū)分,重視“一次法”規(guī)范在入罪時的運用,正確把握法定犯罪與非罪的界限。在法定犯的主觀罪過認(rèn)定上,如果行為人認(rèn)識到行為違反“一次法”規(guī)范,有違法性意識,并且將危害行為繼續(xù)實行的話,是可以成立故意犯罪的。鑒于法定犯的雙重違法性,在具體的司法實踐中,行為人就有可能面臨雙重處罰,需要承擔(dān)雙重責(zé)任,這并不違反一事不再罰原則。 本文的創(chuàng)新之處在于：其一,在理論上將法定犯與行政犯區(qū)別開來,擺脫理論上長期將法定犯與行政犯等同的錯誤認(rèn)識,事實上二者存在很大的差異,這種差異就是二者的真正所指不同；其二,與自然犯的“普常性”對應(yīng),提出法定犯的“超常性”特點,這種“超常性”使法定犯的理論價值得以拓展,不僅局限于在犯罪學(xué)意義上解釋犯罪現(xiàn)象,法定犯的這種特性對于把握法定犯罪行為的本質(zhì)、理解其社會危害性問題上能夠提供新的理解方式,也能更好地把握法定犯入罪的深層次原因,從專業(yè)性上而言,法定犯的特征能夠解釋許多特殊的犯罪現(xiàn)象,所以,在立法上和司法上,對法定犯特點的運用具有實踐意義；其三,將法定犯的“超常性”特征與“一次法”規(guī)范的運用結(jié)合起來,也正是對“一次法”規(guī)范的運用才能更好的解釋法定犯的入罪依據(jù)和解釋特點,這是其“超常性”的體現(xiàn)。因此,在犯定犯的理解問題上,不能依據(jù)所謂的常識來進(jìn)行理解。其四,將“俘獲理論”與刑法的謙抑性結(jié)合起來,解釋法定犯立罪的選擇性問題,說明法定犯在立罪時對利益集團(tuán)的保護(hù),這是一些特殊類的犯罪得以在立法上存在的原因；其五,對嚴(yán)格責(zé)任的具體所指予以明確。英美刑法中的嚴(yán)格責(zé)任是不用證明犯罪人的主觀罪過,我國有學(xué)者認(rèn)為引入嚴(yán)格責(zé)任違背了主客觀相統(tǒng)一原則,實際上,嚴(yán)格責(zé)任是不需要證明主觀罪過,不是不要求,也不是不存在主觀罪過。主觀罪過是客觀存在的,沒有罪過的犯罪是不可能的,所以,在法定犯領(lǐng)域引入嚴(yán)格責(zé)任并無不妥。 本文的不足之處在于：由于理論研究較深,所學(xué)知識有限,在對一些問題進(jìn)行闡釋時顯得有些吃力,比如對法定犯的違法性認(rèn)識問題、嚴(yán)格責(zé)任問題的說明,就暴露出自身理論研究水平的不足,這是需要改進(jìn)的。
[Abstract]:Legal offense is the basic theory of the study of economic criminal law . The concept of legal person , which was originally introduced from the angle of criminology , the natural criminals and the theory of legal crime have classified the crime and the perpetrator by the theory of law .

On the basis of the current literature on the generation and development of legal prisoners , this paper makes an in - depth analysis on the definition , characteristics and values of legal prisoners . On the basis of this , the author further studies the legislation of the criminal law and the application of criminal law , and studies the present situation and existing problems of each part , and puts forward some feasible suggestions . To this end , the thesis mainly studies three aspects .

The first part is the basic theory problem . First , it needs to make clear the connotation of the legal person . First , it is the basic position and the starting point of the legal crime .

Second , compared with the natural crime , the legal crime is characterized by double illegality , specific purpose , professionalism and concealment . If the standard of " ordinary " is adopted , it is difficult to realize the harm of the legal person . The crime of legal crime is also " relativity " . When the legal crime is accepted and recognized by the people and deeply rooted in the people ' s concept , then the case of conversion of the legal person to the natural person will occur .

At last , the theory value of legal crime is analyzed . The legal crime theory can explain the crime phenomenon in the meaning of criminology , which is the value of the original time . In the theory of Galo ' s law , the legal crime is not the real crime , so the legal crime is not the focus of the criminal law .

The second part is the legislative problem of the criminal law of the legal person . First , the legal person is selective in the case of raising the crime . The choice of the legal person to commit the crime needs to be guided by the concept of humility of the criminal law . It is not necessary to use severe punishment . In the legislation of the statutory offense , it is not necessary to use severe punishment . In the legislation of the statutory offense , if the act of violation of the " one - time law " can adopt the civil and administrative punishment measures to achieve the prevention purpose and the protection effect , it is not necessary to use severe punishment . In the legislation of the statutory offence , it is easy to be captured by the interest group , so that the protection of the interest group is involved in the legislation of the legal person , which has to be taken into account in the legislation of the legal offence .

Secondly , we study the legislative practice of legal criminals in Germany , Japan and England and analyze the advantages and disadvantages , and draw lessons from the favorable experience of the practice of extraterritorial legislation . Through the investigation , it is found that there are three main forms , namely , the form of the criminal code , the independent form and the dispersed form .

In the end , the legislation of the legal prisoners is analyzed . On the basis of the experience of the extraterritorial legislation , the author advocates the adoption of the legislative model of dispersed form and the classification of the legal prisoners . The article avoids the excessive intervention of the criminal law , adjusts the size of the criminal circle in due time , and puts forward the development of crime prevention and expansion and non - crime . At the same time , the penalty is gentle and the punishment is improved .

The third part is the application of the criminal law of the legal person . Firstly , it is the legal basis to grasp the crime of legal crime . In view of the dual illegal character of the legal person , it is necessary to unify the illegal and criminal illegality of the " one - time law " in the light of the dual criminality requirement of the legal person . If the harm reaches the amount required by the criminal law , it has criminal illegality . According to the criminal law norms , the illegal act rises to the criminal law according to the criminal law norms . Only the two can be taken into account in order to accurately grasp the legal basis of the crime of the crime .

Secondly , the explanation of legal offense is discussed . As a result of legal offense is the prohibition of law , it must be carried out in accordance with the existing legal norms and adhere to the position of normative doctrine . As the legal person ' s ethical color is weak , it has the characteristics of strong professionalism and high concealment . When it is explained , it is necessary to break through the theory of " three times " and establish a professional and accurate explanation based on the relevant provisions of the Code .

Thirdly , we discuss the illegal cognition of the legal person . The illegal cognition has special status in the problem of legal crime , directly reflects the subjective malignant and psychological attitude towards the result . The author of the legal offense is in violation of the norms of the " one - time law " and may have illegality cognition , which shows the subjective evil of the perpetrator and is closely related to the subjective crime .

Fourthly , we should study the strict liability of legal crime under the unified principle of subjective and objective . The strict liability does not need to prove the subjective crime of the perpetrator , mainly in the public injury crime . In fact , it is difficult to prove the existence of subjective crime in our country ' s criminal law . In practice , it will inevitably lead to the situation of public order , environment and food .

In the end , the author makes a review on the application of the criminal law of the legal person in our country . It is clear that the distinction between the criminal law and the illegal act of " one law " should be made , and the limit of the crime and the non - crime of the statutory crime should be correctly grasped . In view of the dual criminality of the legal person , it is possible to set up the intentional crime . In view of the dual criminality of the legal person , in the specific judicial practice , the actor may face double punishment , and it is necessary to bear the double responsibility , which is not a violation of the principle of impunity .

The innovation of this paper is : Firstly , the legal offense is distinguished from the administrative offence in the theory , and the erroneous understanding between the legal person and the administrative offence in the theory is free from the theory . In fact , there is a great difference between them , and the difference is the real difference between them ;
Second , corresponding to the " ordinary character " of the natural crime , the author puts forward the characteristics of the " supernatural " of the legal crime , which makes the theoretical value of the legal crime expand , not only to explain the crime phenomenon in the meaning of criminology , but also to grasp the deep reason of the legal crime .
Third , combining the " supernormal " character of the legal person and the application of the " primary law " norm , it is also the application of the " primary law " norm in order to better explain the crime of the crime of entering the crime and the interpretation characteristic , which is the reflection of its " supernatural " . Therefore , the " capture theory " and the modesty of the criminal law can not be interpreted according to the so - called common sense .
The strict liability in Anglo - American criminal law does not need to prove the subjective crime of the perpetrator . In fact , the strict liability is not necessary to prove the subjective crime , nor does it require , nor does not there be subjective crime . The subjective crime is objective , and there is no crime that is impossible . Therefore , it is impossible to introduce strict liability in the field of legal offense .

The deficiency of this paper is that because the theory research is deeper , the knowledge is limited , it appears some draft when the interpretation of some problems , such as the illegal cognition of the legal person and the explanation of the strict liability , which exposes the shortcomings of the theoretical research level , which needs to be improved .

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南財經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D914

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 陳忠林;;“常識、常理、常情”:一種法治觀與法學(xué)教育觀[J];太平洋學(xué)報;2007年06期

2 黃明儒;也論行政犯的性質(zhì)及其對行政刑法定位的影響[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2004年05期

3 儲槐植,薛美琴;刑法謙抑——由一則建議稿引發(fā)的思考[J];云南大學(xué)學(xué)報(法學(xué)版);2005年03期

4 胡啟忠;;金融刑法立罪邏輯論——以金融刑法修正為例[J];中國法學(xué);2009年06期

5 傅延威;行政犯罪的定罪與處罰[J];中國刑事法雜志;2000年02期

6 孫萬懷;;法定犯拓展與刑法理論取代[J];政治與法律;2008年12期

7 周少華;;立法技術(shù)與刑法之適應(yīng)性[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報;2011年03期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 胡業(yè)勛;立法上的金融違法行為入罪研究[D];西南財經(jīng)大學(xué);2010年

2 譚兆強;法定犯理論與實踐[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號：1716037