本文選題：實行行為著手 + 法益侵害　； 參考：《山東大學》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：現(xiàn)代刑法理論將實行行為著手納入到犯罪未遂的具體構成要件,作為預備犯與未遂犯的區(qū)分基準,認為犯罪行為的實施一旦開始就表明,該犯罪已經(jīng)不僅僅停留在預備著的階段,而進入到真真正正的實行階段。在實行行為著手之后,如果因行為人意志以外的原因而未能完成犯罪,就脫離犯罪預備,構成犯罪未遂；如果行為人的犯罪行為一直順利進行,直到完成犯罪,那么毫無疑問就構成犯罪的既遂。但對于實行行為著手的認定標準,國內(nèi)外刑法理論界眾說紛紜。這就需要我們對實行行為著手的已有理論進行全面梳理的同時,進一步深入研究。本文主要是從實行行為著手的一般考察、國內(nèi)外理論學說及評析、實行行為著手認定中的特殊形態(tài)進行系統(tǒng)的論述。 本文除引言和結語外共分為以下三個部分： 第一部分：實行行為著手的一般考察。該部分首先對實行行為的概念進行了界定,認為不僅應該堅持我國學界通說的形式主義立場,也應該同時滿足刑法法益侵害的現(xiàn)實緊迫性的實質(zhì)性要件；并在此基礎上提出了實行行為著手的概念,介紹了法國、德國、日本對于實行著手的規(guī)定和我國的立法現(xiàn)狀；最后筆者從實行行為著手的刑事責任功能,即實行著手前的預備行為是否可罰方面,加深了對實行著手意義的理解,并針對我國實行行為著手前的預備行為原則上可罰的規(guī)定進行了批判。 第二部分：實行行為著手的理論學說及評析。該部分首先介紹了大陸法系和英美法系的相關學說,鑒于我國學界通說與大陸法系相關學說有諸多相同之處,本文將大陸法系相關學說作為理解我國刑法學說的理論前提,詳細加以論述。然后介紹了我國通說的形式客觀說和非通說的實質(zhì)客觀說,并在對兩種學說分析論述的基礎上,提出了本文的主張：汲取形式客觀說和實質(zhì)客觀說的合理之處,去除極端的形式說和極端的實質(zhì)說,分為形式和實質(zhì)兩個層次認定實行行為的著手。如果行為人的行為不符合第一個層次,那么就沒有必要進行第二層次的進一步判斷；但當其符合第一個層次時,還必須進行第二個層次的判斷。 第三部分：實行行為著手認定中的特殊形態(tài)。主要介紹了間接正犯、不作為犯、原因自由行為、共謀共同正犯、復合行為犯五種特殊的著手認定形態(tài),分別論述了其內(nèi)部各自的學說,并具體運用形式和實質(zhì)兩個層次輔助進行著手的判定。比如,對于間接正犯實行行為著手的認定贊同被利用行為說,并分別從著手認定的兩個層次分析判定。即形式上已經(jīng)開始實施刑法分則規(guī)定的犯罪構成要件或者構成要件的一部分,實質(zhì)上具備實行行為著手所要求的侵害法益危險的現(xiàn)實、緊迫性。
[Abstract]:The modern criminal law theory takes the practice behavior into the concrete constituent elements of the attempted crime, as the criterion of differentiating the preparatory crime from the attempted crime, and holds that the implementation of the criminal act will be shown as soon as it begins. The crime has not only been in preparation, but into the real stage of implementation. If, after the commission of the act, the crime has not been completed for reasons other than the will of the perpetrator, it is divorced from the preparation for the crime and constitutes an attempt to commit the crime; if the perpetrator's criminal act continues smoothly until the completion of the crime, There is no doubt, then, that the crime is accomplished. However, there are different opinions in the criminal law theoretical circle at home and abroad. This requires us to conduct a comprehensive review of the existing theory of behavior, while further in-depth research. This article is mainly from the general investigation, the domestic and foreign theory theory and the appraisal, carries on the systematic discussion in the practice behavior identification in the special form. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this article is divided into the following three parts: The first part: the general investigation of the practice behavior. This part firstly defines the concept of practice behavior, and thinks that we should not only adhere to the formalism position of the academic circles in our country, but also satisfy the substantive elements of the realistic urgency of the criminal law interest infringement. On the basis of this, the author puts forward the concept of practice action, introduces the regulations of France, Germany and Japan and the present situation of our country's legislation, finally, the author starts with the function of criminal responsibility. That is to say, whether the preparatory act before the implementation of the act can be punished deepens the understanding of the meaning of the practice, and criticizes the stipulation that the preparatory act before the implementation of the act can be punished in principle in our country. The second part: the theory and evaluation of the practice behavior. This part first introduces the relevant theories of the civil law system and the common law system. In view of the fact that there are many similarities between the general theory of our country and the relevant theory of the civil law system, this article regards the relevant theories of the civil law system as the theoretical premise of understanding the theory of criminal law of our country. Discuss in detail. Then it introduces the formal objective theory and the non-general objective theory of our country, and puts forward the proposition of this paper on the basis of the analysis of the two theories: drawing on the rationality of the formal objective theory and the substantive objective theory. Removing extreme form theory and extreme essence theory is divided into two levels: form and substance. If the behavior of the actor does not conform to the first level, then there is no need to make further judgment at the second level, but when it meets the first level, the second level must be judged. The third part: the special form in the identification of practice behavior. This paper mainly introduces five kinds of special identification forms of indirect principal offender, omission crime, free cause act, complicity co-principal offender and compound behavior crime, and discusses their respective theories respectively. And the specific use of form and substance of two levels to assist in the determination of the hand. For example, the identification of the act of the indirect principal offender agrees with the theory of the used behavior, and the two levels of identification are analyzed separately. That is, the form has begun to implement the provisions of the criminal law provisions of the constitutive elements of the crime or part of the constitutive elements, in essence, with the practice of the practice of the act required by the risk of infringement of legal interests, the reality, urgency.
【學位授予單位】：山東大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D914

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前5條

1 趙秉志;;論原因自由行為中實行行為的著手問題[J];法學雜志;2008年05期

2 周光權;當代刑法理論發(fā)展的兩個基本向度[J];江海學刊;2004年03期

3 陳興良;社會危害性理論——一個反思性檢討[J];法學研究;2000年01期

4 曲新久;論社會秩序的刑法保護與控制[J];政法論壇;1998年04期

5 劉士心;;論刑法中的復合危害行為[J];中國刑事法雜志;2004年04期

，

本文編號：1831330