本文選題：偶然防衛(wèi) + 違法性��； 參考：《安徽大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：偶然防衛(wèi)理論是刑法學(xué)中重要的理論,對于完善刑法學(xué)相關(guān)理論和指導(dǎo)司法實踐中遇到的棘手問題具有積極的意義。同時,偶然防衛(wèi)問題的研究還涉及到刑法學(xué)一個重要問題即刑法立場問題。在大陸法系的刑法學(xué)理論中,有著客觀主義立場和主觀主義立場的基本對立,對該問題有完全不同的認(rèn)識和理解�？陀^主義立場學(xué)者支持結(jié)果無價值理論,認(rèn)為基于違法性的本質(zhì)在于行為侵害了法律所保護的客觀法益或者對法益造成了威脅的結(jié)果,因此偶然防衛(wèi)不構(gòu)成犯罪或者說偶然防衛(wèi)可以構(gòu)成犯罪未遂,應(yīng)當(dāng)對于此種行為不予犯罪定性或刑事處罰。主觀主義立場學(xué)者多半支持行為無價值理論的觀點,違法性的基準(zhǔn)也被定性為行為人主觀上具有違反法律規(guī)范秩序的主觀惡性,因此傾向于認(rèn)為偶然防衛(wèi)構(gòu)成犯罪且成立既遂。 本文先從介紹偶然防衛(wèi)的概念入手,收集和整理了相關(guān)書籍和論文資料,并運用分析法、比較法、經(jīng)驗總結(jié)法等研究方法,著重從結(jié)果無價值理論和行為無價值理論立場出發(fā),分析違法性的本質(zhì),從而對偶然防衛(wèi)的分類、定性、犯罪形態(tài)以及刑事處罰等具體問題進行分析和歸納,以期對偶然防衛(wèi)問題有所了解。偶然防衛(wèi)是指在主觀上沒有防衛(wèi)意識卻在客觀上針對正在進行的不法侵害實施了防衛(wèi)行為,區(qū)別于正當(dāng)防衛(wèi)和認(rèn)識錯誤。正是偶然防衛(wèi)具有正當(dāng)防衛(wèi)的合法外觀,導(dǎo)致偶然防衛(wèi)的定性以及處罰成為討論的難題。結(jié)果無價值理論堅持認(rèn)為違法性的實質(zhì)在于侵害了法益,偶然防衛(wèi)在客觀上保護了合法權(quán)益因此不構(gòu)成犯罪,更不存在處罰的可能。而行為無價值理論認(rèn)為違法性是由行為無價值所決定,完全不用考慮法益受到侵害或者受到威脅的實質(zhì)意義,至于這種結(jié)果只是偶然所得,也就是從違法內(nèi)容中排除了結(jié)果無價值,因此偶然防衛(wèi)行為人實施了違反法律規(guī)范的行為,必然具備了違法的本質(zhì)。筆者堅持二元行為無價值理論,其核心觀點是,行為無價值和結(jié)果無價值兩方面均是判斷違法性的基石,要主觀判斷和客觀判斷相結(jié)合,包含在對社會倫理秩序的保護之中的法益保護才是我們應(yīng)當(dāng)實現(xiàn)的。 同時,本文認(rèn)為無論堅持主觀主義立場還是堅持客觀主義立場,對于違法性進行判斷的根本意義在于指導(dǎo)司法實踐,實現(xiàn)刑法目的。進而就偶然防衛(wèi)是否構(gòu)成犯罪、構(gòu)成何種犯罪以及如何進行處罰進行了具體的制度構(gòu)想。區(qū)分故意的偶然防衛(wèi)和過失的偶然防衛(wèi),行為犯和結(jié)果犯,充分考慮行為的主觀惡性、社會危害性的大小、行為人行為時的年齡、智力以及精神狀態(tài)等條件。并且考慮到偶然防衛(wèi)的現(xiàn)實意義,在偶然防衛(wèi)行為構(gòu)成犯罪的情況下,不論既遂或未遂的情節(jié),都應(yīng)當(dāng)充分考慮其減輕社會危害程度的作用,從而合理合法的量刑處罰。
[Abstract]:The theory of accidental defense is an important theory in criminal law, which has positive significance for perfecting the relevant theories of criminal law and guiding the thorny problems encountered in judicial practice. At the same time, the study of accidental defense also involves an important issue of criminal law, that is, the criminal law position. In the criminal law theory of the continental law system, there is a basic opposition between objectivism and subjectivism, and there is a completely different understanding and understanding of this problem. The objectivism standpoint scholars support the theory of no value of the result, and believe that the essence of illegality lies in the result that the behavior infringes the objective legal interests protected by the law or threatens the legal interests. Therefore, accidental defense does not constitute a crime or accidental defense can constitute an attempted crime, such acts should not be criminalized or punished. Most of the subjectivism scholars support the theory of behavior without value, and the criterion of illegality is characterized as the subjective malignancy of the perpetrator who has violated the legal norms and order subjectively, so he tends to think that accidental defense constitutes a crime and is established as accomplished. This paper begins with the introduction of the concept of accidental defense, collects and arranges the relevant books and papers, and applies the methods of analysis, comparison, experience summary and so on, focusing on the standpoint of the theory of no value of results and the theory of behavior without value. By analyzing the nature of illegality, the author analyzes and induces the classification, qualitative analysis, criminal form and criminal punishment of accidental defense, in order to understand the problem of accidental defense. Accidental defense refers to the subjective lack of defense consciousness but objectively against the ongoing illegal violations of the defense behavior, which is different from legitimate defense and cognitive errors. It is fortuitous defense that has the legal appearance of legitimate defense, which leads to the discussion of the nature and punishment of accidental defense. Results the theory of no value insists that the essence of illegality lies in infringing legal interests, and that accidental defense objectively protects legitimate rights and interests and thus does not constitute a crime, let alone the possibility of punishment. The theory of behavior without value holds that illegality is determined by the lack of value of the act and does not take into account the substantive significance of the legal interest being infringed or threatened. That is to say, the result is not valuable from the illegal content, so the act of violating the legal norms is carried out by the accidental defense actor, which is bound to have the essence of breaking the law. The author insists on the theory of dualistic behavior with no value. The core point of view is that the behavior without value and the result without value are the cornerstone of judging illegality, and the subjective judgment and objective judgment should be combined. The protection of legal interests included in the protection of social ethical order is what we should realize. At the same time, this paper holds that the fundamental significance of judging illegality lies in guiding judicial practice and realizing the purpose of criminal law, regardless of whether we insist on subjectivism or objectivism. Then, this paper makes a concrete system conception on whether accidental defense constitutes a crime, what kind of crime is constituted and how to carry out punishment. It distinguishes intentional accidental defense from negligent accidental defense, behavioral offense and resultant offense, and fully considers the subjective malignancy of behavior, the size of social harmfulness, the age, intelligence and mental state of the behavior of the perpetrator. And considering the practical significance of accidental defense, in the case that accidental defense constitutes a crime, whether accomplished or attempted circumstances, we should fully consider its role in reducing the degree of social harm, thus reasonable and lawful sentencing punishment.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D914

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 劉蘭芳;;淺談刑法中的行為問題[J];青春歲月;2011年14期

2 胡安瑞;;也談刑法學(xué)中結(jié)果無價值與行為無價值之爭[J];山東審判;2008年04期

3 山口厚;金光旭;;日本刑法學(xué)中的行為無價值論與結(jié)果無價值論[J];中外法學(xué);2008年04期

4 周光權(quán);論刑法學(xué)中的規(guī)范違反說[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2005年02期

，

本文編號：1793713