發(fā)布時間：2018-05-10 15:29

  本文選題：先行行為 + 法理依據(jù)��； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：先行行為作為引起不純正不作為犯罪作為義務(wù)的來源，自十九世紀(jì)起便得到了刑法理論和司法判例的肯定。雖然歷經(jīng)一百余年的發(fā)展，先行行為理論仍然存在法理依據(jù)不足、內(nèi)涵模糊不清、判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不明等問題，導(dǎo)致司法實踐對作為義務(wù)的認(rèn)定語焉不詳。正是理論研究的裹足不前，使先行行為遭致了批判。對先行行為理論進(jìn)行深入研究，不僅能為先行行為正名，還有助于確定先行行為的內(nèi)涵與外延并為司法實踐提供可操作的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。 本文除引言與結(jié)語外共分為四個部分： 第一部分：從先行行為的發(fā)展譜系出發(fā)，對先行行為理論的發(fā)展歷史作了簡要梳理，肯定其作為形式義務(wù)來源的歷史地位。同時，對先行行為理論發(fā)展過程中的爭議做出回應(yīng)，肯定先行行為存在合理的法理依據(jù)和必要性。 第二部分：在對現(xiàn)有先行行為法理依據(jù)的分析基礎(chǔ)上，通過對引起刑事義務(wù)的實質(zhì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行分析并結(jié)合支配理論，提出先行行為是一種上升為刑事法律評價的嚴(yán)重破壞倫理觀念的行為，，其背后的法理便在于倫理觀念所蘊含的對國民安全感的保障，期待并信賴引起危險者在具有某種支配力時應(yīng)阻止危險的實現(xiàn)，對此種期待與信賴的違背乃嚴(yán)重破壞倫理觀念之行為。 第三部分：本文所謂之先行行為作為能夠引起刑事作為義務(wù)的特定前行為，是一種刑事法律根據(jù)前行為與危險狀態(tài)的關(guān)系以及行為人事后所處之具體客觀環(huán)境而進(jìn)行的法律擬制。先行行為在內(nèi)涵上具有致因性、法律性、相當(dāng)性與支配性四方面的本質(zhì)屬性。先行行為的外延在規(guī)范評價上包括部分合法行為、違法行為和犯罪行為，在主觀心態(tài)上包括部分無意識的行為，在實施方式上僅限于作為。先行行為內(nèi)涵與外延的厘清，也為其判斷提供了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。 第四部分：理論的研究應(yīng)歸根于實踐的適用。本文在對先行行為進(jìn)行簡要歸類的基礎(chǔ)上結(jié)合先行行為判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對相關(guān)典型案例作了深入分析，以期為先行行為的司法適用確立樣本。
[Abstract]:The antecedent act, as the source of the obligation to cause the crime of impure omission, has been affirmed by the theory of criminal law and judicial precedent since the nineteenth century. Although after more than one hundred years of development, there are still some problems in the theory of antecedent behavior, such as lack of legal basis, vague connotation and unclear standard of judgment, which lead to the ambiguity of judicial practice in the determination of duty of action. It is the lack of progress in theoretical research that makes the antecedents subject to criticism. Further study on the theory of antecedent behavior can not only correct the name of antecedent act, but also help to determine the connotation and extension of antecedent act and provide an operational criterion for judicial practice. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into four parts: The first part: starting from the development pedigree of antecedent behavior, this paper briefly combs the development history of antecedent behavior theory and affirms its historical position as the source of formal obligation. At the same time, the author responds to the controversy in the development of antecedent behavior theory, and affirms that there is reasonable legal basis and necessity for antecedent behavior. The second part: on the basis of the analysis of the legal basis of the existing antecedents, through the analysis of the essential standards that give rise to the criminal obligation and the combination of the dominating theory, It is pointed out that antecedent behavior is a kind of behavior that seriously destroys the ethical concept which is raised to the criminal legal evaluation. The legal principle behind it lies in the guarantee of the national security contained in the ethical concept. To expect and trust the person who causes danger should prevent the realization of danger when he has a certain power, and the violation of such expectation and trust is a serious violation of ethical concept. The third part: the so-called antecedent act in this paper can give rise to the obligation of criminal act. It is a kind of legal fiction based on the relationship between the former act and the dangerous state and the concrete objective environment in which the perpetrator is afterwards. Antecedent behavior has four essential attributes: causative, legal, equivalent and dominant. The extension of antecedents includes some legal acts, illegal acts and criminal acts in the normative evaluation, some unconscious acts in the subjective state of mind, and only acts in the way of implementation. The clarification of the connotation and extension of antecedent behavior also provides the standard for its judgment. The fourth part: the research of theory should be rooted in the application of practice. Based on a brief classification of antecedents, this paper makes a thorough analysis of some typical cases in order to establish a sample for the judicial application of antecedents combined with the judgment criteria of antecedents.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(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10條

1 劉士心;;不純正不作為犯罪中先行行為引起的義務(wù)研究[J];北方法學(xué);2007年06期

2 李曉龍,李成;不純正不作為犯作為義務(wù)來源研究[J];北京市政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;1999年02期

3 曹盛;郭理蓉;;先行行為的定位、范圍及立法之探討[J];法學(xué)雜志;2010年08期

4 何榮功;;不真正不作為犯的構(gòu)造與等價值的判斷[J];法學(xué)評論;2010年01期

5 王志強(qiáng);許相明;;不作為犯罪中的先行行為[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(下半月);2007年10期

6 謝紹華;;先行行為不作為犯與結(jié)果加重犯的區(qū)別與認(rèn)定[J];北京政法職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報;2013年01期

7 王瑩;;論犯罪行為人的先行行為保證人地位[J];法學(xué)家;2013年02期

8 常鳳香,胡劍;交通肇事罪逃逸問題研究[J];河南公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報;2005年03期

9 朱禎學(xué);;特定道德義務(wù)應(yīng)是不作為犯罪的作為義務(wù)來源[J];河南公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報;2007年03期

10 于改之;也論先行行為的范圍[J];湖南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;2001年05期

本文編號：1869860