本文選題：共犯脫離 + 共犯中止　； 參考：《蘇州大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：共犯關(guān)系的脫離，是指共犯關(guān)系成立之后，完成犯罪之前，部分共犯切斷與其他共犯之間的關(guān)系，退出該共犯關(guān)系，但其他共犯人基于新的共犯關(guān)系繼續(xù)實施犯罪，并引起了當(dāng)初的共犯關(guān)系所預(yù)謀的情形。共犯的脫離可以發(fā)生在共犯關(guān)系的任何階段，具體包括著手實行犯罪之前、著手之后既遂之前、既遂之后三個階段。共犯脫離既存共犯關(guān)系之后，對其他共犯基于新的共謀所形成的新的共犯關(guān)系而實施的犯罪行為及其結(jié)果，不承擔(dān)刑事責(zé)任，僅對其脫離之前的行為承擔(dān)罪責(zé)。目前，我國在司法實踐中對共犯脫離情形的處理方式是：能夠判斷為中止的，成立中止犯；不能成立中止犯的，和其他共犯承擔(dān)同樣的罪責(zé)，脫離事實只是酌定從輕處罰情節(jié)。但是，這并不能解決實踐中共犯關(guān)系脫離的所有問題，譬如在結(jié)果加重犯中，共犯在加重結(jié)果出現(xiàn)之前脫離的，即便法官經(jīng)自由裁量酌定從輕處罰，最后的量刑結(jié)果仍可能過于嚴(yán)苛；而且，部分共犯脫離共犯關(guān)系，盡管一般是出于己意具有任意性，但并非完全如此，因而不能將共犯關(guān)系的脫離簡單地認(rèn)為是中止犯成立與否的問題。為了更好地處理此類問題，司法實踐就有必要運(yùn)用共犯關(guān)系脫離理論。實踐中適用共犯脫離理論，既可以在定罪量刑方面盡力達(dá)到罪刑均衡，保證刑罰的公正；還可以給共犯人提供一條“回歸之路”，，有助于特殊預(yù)防的實現(xiàn)，同時，一定程度上也有利于最大限度地保護(hù)面臨侵犯或者已經(jīng)遭受侵犯的法益。
[Abstract]:The separation of accomplice refers to the fact that, after the establishment of the accomplice relationship and before the completion of the crime, some accomplices sever the relationship with other accomplices and withdraw from the accomplice relationship, but the other accomplices continue to commit the crime based on the new accomplice relationship, And gave rise to the original complicity of the premeditated situation. The breakaway of accomplice may occur at any stage of the accomplice relationship, including three stages before, after, and after the commission of the crime. After the accomplice breaks away from the existing accomplice relationship, the other accomplices who commit the criminal acts based on the new accomplices formed by the new complicity and their results are not criminally liable, but only guilty of the behaviors before their secession. At present, in judicial practice, the way to deal with the circumstances of accomplice separation in our country is as follows: those who can be judged to be suspended, and those who cannot be suspended bear the same criminal responsibility as the other accomplices, and the circumstances of breaking away from the facts are only determined to be lenient. However, this does not solve all the problems of the separation of accomplices in practice, for example, in aggravated consequential offences, where accomplices leave before the aggravating result occurs, even if the judge, at the discretion of the judge, is given a lighter punishment, The final sentencing result may still be too harsh; moreover, although some accomplices break away from accomplices, although they are generally arbitrary, they are not entirely so. Therefore, the separation of accomplice cannot simply be regarded as the question of whether the discontinuance is established or not. In order to deal with this kind of problem better, it is necessary to use the theory of disconnection of accomplice relation in judicial practice. The application of the theory of accomplice separation in practice can not only achieve the balance of crime and punishment in the aspect of conviction and sentencing, but also provide a "way to return" to accomplices, which is helpful to the realization of special prevention, at the same time, To a certain extent, it is also conducive to the maximum protection of legal interests that are or have been violated.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(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 劉雪梅;;實行犯中止的認(rèn)定[J];法學(xué)雜志;2010年10期

2 大谷實,王昭武;日本刑法中正犯與共犯的區(qū)別——與中國刑法中的“共同犯罪”相比照[J];法學(xué)評論;2002年06期

3 趙慧;論共犯關(guān)系的脫離[J];法學(xué)評論;2003年05期

4 王昭武;;我國“共犯關(guān)系的脫離”研究述評[J];刑法論叢;2007年02期

5 劉凌梅;論共同犯罪關(guān)系的脫離[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報;2003年02期

6 王昭武;;論共謀的射程[J];中外法學(xué);2013年01期

7 劉艷紅;;共犯脫離判斷基準(zhǔn):規(guī)范的因果關(guān)系遮斷說[J];中外法學(xué);2013年04期

本文編號：1955695