發(fā)布時間：2018-04-29 12:50

  本文選題：風(fēng)險刑法 + 風(fēng)險社會��； 參考：《東南大學(xué)》2016年博士論文

【摘要】：近年來,以風(fēng)險社會為研究背景,以防范風(fēng)險為目的導(dǎo)向的風(fēng)險刑法理論在我國刑法學(xué)界風(fēng)靡一時。該理論認(rèn)為傳統(tǒng)的罪責(zé)刑法理論應(yīng)對風(fēng)險已經(jīng)力不從心,應(yīng)當(dāng)將刑法保護(hù)界限向前推置,以反映風(fēng)險社會以安全為主要價值取向的現(xiàn)實需求。圍繞安全凌駕于自由這一價值取向,風(fēng)險刑法主張對傳統(tǒng)刑法理論的罪、責(zé)、刑各方面進(jìn)行全方位的變革,并通過增設(shè)抽象危險犯等方式來實現(xiàn)擴(kuò)大刑罰處罰范圍和嚴(yán)密刑事法網(wǎng)的目的,以期能夠有效地預(yù)防和控制風(fēng)險。上述主張引發(fā)了刑法學(xué)界諸多學(xué)者的質(zhì)疑和批判,認(rèn)為風(fēng)險刑法理論是在曲解了風(fēng)險社會涵義的基礎(chǔ)之上所衍生出的充滿了反法治風(fēng)險的理論思潮,其顛覆了刑法謙抑的基本立場,忽視了我國當(dāng)前處于法治建設(shè)初級階段的事實,助推了我國當(dāng)前不斷進(jìn)行犯罪化刑事立法的勢頭,應(yīng)當(dāng)予以反思和批判。為了更加系統(tǒng)地闡明風(fēng)險刑法理論的不足,本文梳理并反思了風(fēng)險刑法理論的系列理論變革和立法主張,并在批判的基礎(chǔ)上結(jié)合風(fēng)險刑法立法的實踐問題,對風(fēng)險社會背景之下我國刑事立法的界限進(jìn)行了思考,提出了風(fēng)險社會中新型危害行為的入罪化標(biāo)準(zhǔn),以期約束刑法不斷擴(kuò)張的處罰范圍,避免公民的自由與人權(quán)遭受侵犯。本文的正文部分共分為六章,主要內(nèi)容如下：第一章為“風(fēng)險刑法理論研究現(xiàn)狀”,共分為四節(jié)。第一節(jié)揭示了風(fēng)險刑法的源起,追溯了風(fēng)險刑法理論在德日和我國刑法學(xué)界的產(chǎn)生與發(fā)展歷程,揭示我國風(fēng)險刑法論者對風(fēng)險刑法概念的曲解和濫用；第二節(jié)梳理了風(fēng)險刑法理論的基本脈絡(luò),其論證邏輯為：首先指出傳統(tǒng)刑法在風(fēng)險社會中遭遇的種種困境,繼而針對這些困境提出相應(yīng)的變革主張,最后以現(xiàn)實立法證明風(fēng)險刑法理論是順應(yīng)時代發(fā)展的理論選擇;第三節(jié)敘述了風(fēng)險刑法理論面臨的質(zhì)疑,主要包括兩個方面：一方面是針對風(fēng)險社會理論這一風(fēng)險刑法的社會學(xué)依據(jù)進(jìn)行的反駁,另一方面則是針對風(fēng)險刑法理論自身所存在的反法治風(fēng)險進(jìn)行的批判；第四節(jié)為小結(jié),在總結(jié)了風(fēng)險刑法理論爭議的焦點之后,指出在刑法應(yīng)當(dāng)如何應(yīng)對風(fēng)險社會的問題上,不僅風(fēng)險刑法理論的支持者與反對者各執(zhí)一詞,甚至在風(fēng)險刑法理論支持者和反對者各自的陣營內(nèi)部也存在不同的主張。第二章為“探尋風(fēng)險刑法的原貌”,共分為三節(jié)。第一節(jié)闡述了風(fēng)險刑法的社會學(xué)依據(jù)——風(fēng)險社會理論,在研究了“風(fēng)險”概念的內(nèi)涵和風(fēng)險社會的生成邏輯的基礎(chǔ)上,探討我國是否已經(jīng)進(jìn)入風(fēng)險社會的問題,認(rèn)為應(yīng)當(dāng)認(rèn)可風(fēng)險社會已經(jīng)成為研究中國問題的現(xiàn)實背景,但風(fēng)險社會的概念在我國必須被重新解構(gòu)和定義；第二節(jié)分析了從風(fēng)險社會到風(fēng)險刑法的理論跨越,否認(rèn)了“風(fēng)險”是風(fēng)險社會理論和風(fēng)險刑法理論的連接點,肯定了風(fēng)險社會只能作為探討風(fēng)險刑法的現(xiàn)實語境；第三節(jié)為小結(jié),進(jìn)一步指出風(fēng)險刑法理論并非是一種全新的理論體系,而是面對社會變遷刑法應(yīng)當(dāng)如何應(yīng)對的傳統(tǒng)問題。第三章為“風(fēng)險刑法的現(xiàn)實依據(jù)：‘風(fēng)險’與‘不安’”,共分為三節(jié)。第一節(jié)否認(rèn)了風(fēng)險刑法理論將“風(fēng)險”作為刑法變革依據(jù)的科學(xué)性,風(fēng)險社會并不意味著風(fēng)險的現(xiàn)實增多或加劇,而是一個融合了客觀性與建構(gòu)性的概念,作為風(fēng)險刑法理論的現(xiàn)實依據(jù)并不嚴(yán)謹(jǐn),而刑法基于其本質(zhì)特征也無法成為應(yīng)對風(fēng)險最有效的手段；第二節(jié)批判了風(fēng)險刑法以民眾的安全感作為保護(hù)法益的謬誤,因為安全感是一種無法觀測和量化的主觀感受,達(dá)不到刑法的明確性要求,以安全感作為刑法所保護(hù)的法益不僅無法實現(xiàn)法益指導(dǎo)刑事立法的機(jī)能,還將導(dǎo)致民粹主義的刑事立法；第三節(jié)為小結(jié),點明了刑法固然應(yīng)當(dāng)隨著時代的發(fā)展而變遷,但刑法自身的品格不能泯滅。第四章為“風(fēng)險刑法的價值取向：安全凌駕于自由”,共分為四節(jié)。第一節(jié)對風(fēng)險刑法的犯罪觀進(jìn)行反思和批判。首先指出風(fēng)險刑法犯罪觀的典型學(xué)說“風(fēng)險誘致說”并未脫離規(guī)范違反說的基本立場,且因為在語義上缺乏明確性而更加威脅公民的自由,其所推崇的敵人刑法也面臨學(xué)界多種質(zhì)疑和批判。其次敘明了風(fēng)險刑法理論將法益概念引向終結(jié)的事實,強(qiáng)調(diào)法益內(nèi)涵應(yīng)當(dāng)具有邊界,防范風(fēng)險與法益保護(hù)并不沖突；第二節(jié)分析了風(fēng)險刑法的責(zé)任觀,指出了“負(fù)責(zé)主義”和罪責(zé)功能化的不足,刑法應(yīng)當(dāng)堅守責(zé)任主義原則；第三節(jié)討論了風(fēng)險刑法的刑罰觀,總結(jié)了風(fēng)險刑法選擇目的刑論而否定報應(yīng)刑論的理由并予以反駁,強(qiáng)調(diào)報應(yīng)刑論的重要價值在于為刑罰提供了限制原則,而風(fēng)險刑法理論對積極的一般預(yù)防理論的濫用將會導(dǎo)致重刑主義之下的人權(quán)保障缺失；第四節(jié)為小結(jié),總結(jié)了風(fēng)險刑法理論在刑法教義學(xué)中所執(zhí)的理論觀點背后存在一個統(tǒng)一的價值取向,即安全凌駕于自由。但在我國刑事法治尚未實現(xiàn)的情形之下,自由價值應(yīng)當(dāng)獲得更多的重視。第五章為“風(fēng)險刑法的立法追求：犯罪圈的不斷擴(kuò)張”,共分為四節(jié)。第一節(jié)針對風(fēng)險刑法擴(kuò)張犯罪圈的主要手段——抽象危險犯展開探討,認(rèn)為抽象危險犯不能無限擴(kuò)張刑法的處罰范圍,應(yīng)當(dāng)允許對抽象危險犯中的“危險”進(jìn)行反證,并通過對抽象危險犯的設(shè)定范圍進(jìn)行限定和依據(jù)但書的出罪理念對抽象危險犯進(jìn)行出罪來限制抽象危險犯的可罰范圍；第二節(jié)針對風(fēng)險刑法所主張的立法模式的轉(zhuǎn)變,即法定犯時代的到來,探討了自然犯與法定犯的區(qū)分、風(fēng)險刑法與法定犯的共生關(guān)聯(lián)和法定犯擴(kuò)張的隱患與限制問題；第三節(jié)分別以醉駕型危險駕駛罪、恐怖活動犯罪、環(huán)境犯罪這三類典型的風(fēng)險刑法立法的實踐效果揭示了風(fēng)險刑法理論所主張的擴(kuò)大刑法處罰范圍并未在實踐中取得預(yù)期的良好效果,反而證明了僅僅依靠刑法難以解決風(fēng)險社會中出現(xiàn)的各種危害行為；第四節(jié)為小結(jié),反思了以立法來證明理論合理性的邏輯,面對不斷擴(kuò)張的犯罪圈,應(yīng)當(dāng)停止犯罪化的刑事立法。第六章為“風(fēng)險社會中傳統(tǒng)刑法的堅守”,共分為三節(jié)。第一節(jié)討論了風(fēng)險社會中刑法的定位問題,由于我國風(fēng)險管理的缺失主要在于功利導(dǎo)向的公共決策和風(fēng)險預(yù)測監(jiān)控機(jī)制的缺失,有效管理風(fēng)險應(yīng)當(dāng)在改變行政觀念,在行政法領(lǐng)域進(jìn)行具體的風(fēng)險防控制度設(shè)計,刑法只能作為保障行政法有效實施的最后手段法；第二節(jié)以毒駕入刑這一現(xiàn)實爭議問題為視角,研究了風(fēng)險社會中的刑事立法界限,認(rèn)為刑法應(yīng)當(dāng)堅守刑法謙抑的基本立場,以行為具有社會危害性、入罪后能夠通過公平且不歧視的執(zhí)行來認(rèn)定、入罪后能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)刑罰的目的,沒有其他社會控制手段可以代替刑罰這四個條件作為風(fēng)險社會中出現(xiàn)的新型危害行為的入罪標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。依據(jù)該入罪標(biāo)準(zhǔn),毒駕行為不應(yīng)立即被納入刑法規(guī)制的范圍；第三節(jié)為小結(jié),風(fēng)險社會的到來天然地導(dǎo)致犯罪圈具有擴(kuò)張的傾向,因此,刑法所面臨的問題不應(yīng)當(dāng)是刑法是否可以或者是在多大范圍上替代其他社會治理手段,而是犯罪圈的范圍應(yīng)當(dāng)如何清晰界定才不至于侵犯公民自由的問題。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the theory of risk criminal law, guided by risk prevention, is popular in the criminal law circle of our country. The theory holds that the traditional theory of criminal responsibility criminal law has been hard to deal with the risk. It should be pushed forward to the criminal law protection limit, so as to reflect the reality of the risk society with security as the main value orientation. Demand. Around the value orientation of security overriding freedom, the risk criminal law advocates all aspects of the reform of the crime, responsibility and punishment in the traditional criminal theory, and the purpose of expanding the penalty scope and the strict criminal law through the addition of abstract dangerous offenders, in order to effectively prevent and control the risk. It has aroused the question and criticism of many scholars in the criminal law field. It is believed that the theory of risk criminal law is a theoretical trend of thought derived from the misinterpretation of the meaning of the risk society. It subverts the basic position of the modesty of the criminal law, neglects the fact that our country is at the primary stage of the construction of the law and boosts our country. In order to clarify the shortage of the theory of risk criminal law more systematically, this article combs and rethinks the series of theoretical changes and legislative ideas of the theory of risk criminal law, and on the basis of criticism, it combines the practical problems of the legislation of the risk punishment law and is under the background of the risk society. The boundary of criminal legislation in our country has been considered, and the criminalization standard of the new type of dangerous behavior in the risk society is put forward in order to restrain the scope of the criminal law expanding and avoid the infringement of the freedom and human rights of the citizens. The main content of this article is divided into six chapters: the first chapter is "the present situation of the research on the theory of the risk criminal law" The first section is divided into four sections. The first section reveals the origin of the risk criminal law, traces the history of the emergence and development of the theory of risk criminal law in Germany and Japan and the criminal law of China, reveals the misinterpretation and abuse of the concept of risk penal law in China, and the second section has combed the basic vein of the theory of risk criminal law. In the third section, the third section describes the question of the theory of risk criminal law, which mainly includes two aspects: on the one hand, it aims at the theory of risk society. The sociological basis of this risk criminal law is refutation, on the other hand, it is the criticism of the risk of the anti rule of law that exists in the theory of the risk criminal law. The fourth section is a summary. After summarizing the focus of the theory of the theory of the risk of the criminal law, it points out how the criminal law should deal with the problem of the risk society, not only the theory of the risk criminal law. The supporters and opponents of the second chapter also have different opinions within the respective camp of the proponents and opponents of the risk criminal law. The first section is divided into three sections. The first section expounds the sociological basis of the risk criminal law, the social theory of risk, and the concept of "risk". On the basis of the formation logic of the connotation and the risk society, this paper discusses whether our country has entered the risk society, and thinks that the risk society should be recognized as the realistic background of the study of China, but the concept of the risk society must be restructured and defined in our country; the second section analyses the theory of the criminal law from the risk society to the risk. It denies that "risk" is the connection point of the theory of risk society and the theory of risk criminal law. It affirms that the risk society can only be used as the realistic context of exploring the criminal law of risk. The third section is a summary and further points out that the theory of the risk criminal law is not a brand new theoretical system, but a transmission of the social vicissitude criminal law. The third chapter is "the realistic basis of the risk criminal law: 'risk' and 'uneasiness'". It is divided into three sections. The first section denies that the risk criminal theory takes "risk" as the scientific basis of the reform of the criminal law. The risk society does not mean that the reality of the risk is increasing or intensifying, but a concept of fusion of objectivity and constructivism. As the real basis of the theory of the risk criminal law is not strict, and the criminal law can not be the most effective means to deal with the risk based on its essential characteristics. The second section criticizes the risk penal law as the fallacy of protecting the legal interests of the people, because the sense of security is a subjective feeling that can not be observed and quantified and can not reach the clarity of the criminal law. It is required that a sense of security as the legal benefit protected by the criminal law not only can not realize the function of the legal interests to guide the criminal legislation, but also will lead to the criminal legislation of populism. The third section indicates that the criminal law should change with the development of the times, but the character of the criminal law can not be vanished. The fourth chapter is "the value orientation of the risk criminal law." It is divided into four sections. The first section rethinks and criticizes the crime view of the risk criminal law. First, it points out that the typical theory of risk criminal law crime "risk induced theory" is not divorced from the basic standpoint of the standard violation, and is more threatening the freedom of the citizens because of the lack of clarity in the semantics. The criminal law also faces many questions and criticisms in the academic circle. Secondly, it describes the fact that the theory of the risk criminal law leads to the end of the concept of legal interest. It emphasizes that the connotation of legal interest should have the boundary, the prevention of risk and the protection of legal interests do not conflict; the second section analyses the liability view of the risk criminal law, and points out the insufficiency of the functionalism of "responsible" and the crime, the criminal law We should stick to the principle of responsibility; the third section discusses the penalty view of the risk criminal law, summarizes the reasons for the choice of the purpose of the risk criminal law and negates the reasons for the theory of retribution penalty and refute, emphasizing that the important value of the theory of retribution penalty is that the principle of restriction is provided for the penalty, and the abuse of the positive general prevention theory by the theory of risk punishment will be abused. It leads to the lack of human rights protection under the doctrine of heavy punishment; the fourth section is a summary, and concludes that there is a unified value orientation behind the theory of the theory of risk criminal law in the doctrinal theory of criminal law, that is, security is overriding freedom. But under the situation that the criminal law has not been realized in our country, the free value should be paid more attention. Fifth The chapter is "the legislative pursuit of the risk criminal law: the continuous expansion of the criminal circle", which is divided into four sections. The first section discusses the main means of the crime circle of the expansion of the criminal law of the criminal law, the abstract dangerous crime, and thinks that the abstract dangerous criminals can not expand the scope of the penal law indefinitely, and should allow the "danger" in the abstract dangerous criminals to be reproved. Through the definition of the scope of the abstract dangerous crime and the crime of proviso to the abstract dangerous criminal to limit the penalty scope of the abstract dangerous offender; the second section aims at the transformation of the legislative pattern advocated by the criminal law, that is, the arrival of the time of the legal criminal, and discusses the distinction between the natural and the legal offenders, the criminal law and the criminal law. The co-occurrence of legal offenders and the hidden dangers and restrictions of the expansion of statutory offenders; the third sections, respectively, the practice effects of the three types of typical risk criminal legislation such as drunk driving type, terrorist crime and environmental crime, reveal that the scope of penal penal punishment advocated by the theory of risk criminal law does not achieve the expected good effect in practice. Fruit, on the contrary, proves that it is difficult to solve all kinds of harmful behavior in the risk society only by criminal law. The fourth section is a summary, reflecting the logic of proving the rationalization of the theory by legislation. In the face of the continuous expansion of the criminal circle, the criminal legislation should be stopped. The sixth chapter is "the persistence of the traditional criminal law in the risk society". The three section. The first section discusses the position of criminal law in the risk society. Because the lack of risk management in China lies mainly in the lack of utility oriented public decision-making and risk prediction and monitoring mechanism, the effective management risks should be changed in the administrative concept and the design of the specific risk prevention and control system in the field of administrative law, and the criminal law can only be used as a guarantee. The final means of the effective implementation of the administrative law; the second section, from the perspective of the real dispute, studies the boundary of the criminal legislation in the risk society, and considers that the criminal law should stick to the basic position of the criminal law, with the social harmfulness of the act, and can be identified by the enforcement of fair and non discrimination after the crime, and after the crime, the criminal law can be found. For the purpose of realizing the penalty, there is no other social control means to replace the four conditions of the penalty as a standard of incrimination of a new type of dangerous behavior in a risk society. According to the standard of admission, the behavior of toxic driving should not be immediately included in the scope of the criminal law regulation; the third section is a summary, and the arrival of the risk society will naturally lead to the crime circle. There is a tendency to expand, therefore, the problems facing the criminal law should not be whether the criminal law can or is in a large scope to replace the other means of social governance, but how the scope of the criminal circle should be clearly defined as not to infringe on civil liberties.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：東南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D924.1
，

本文編號：1820004