【摘要】：法益與利益之間關(guān)系密切，，法益是利益在法律上的動(dòng)態(tài)反映。從語義上看，法益是指由法益主體所享有的法律利益，其范圍包括現(xiàn)實(shí)利益和期待利益。污染環(huán)境罪的法益即環(huán)境利益，具有生態(tài)性、廣泛性和國(guó)際性；環(huán)境是指自然環(huán)境和社會(huì)環(huán)境，其外延包括生態(tài)環(huán)境；環(huán)境利益的主體除了自然人、法人及其他組織和國(guó)家之外，在一定程度上還包括非人類存在物；環(huán)境利益的內(nèi)容因不同的環(huán)境而有所不同。 與污染環(huán)境罪的保護(hù)法益密切聯(lián)系，污染環(huán)境罪的行為方式主要包括環(huán)境污染行為、水污染行為、大氣污染行為、海洋污染行為、固體廢棄物污染行為，結(jié)果包括實(shí)害結(jié)果和危險(xiǎn)結(jié)果。污染環(huán)境罪的因果關(guān)系對(duì)傳統(tǒng)刑法因果關(guān)系理論提出了嚴(yán)峻挑戰(zhàn)，因危害行為具有復(fù)雜性、持久性、不可預(yù)測(cè)性、高科技性，因此以高度蓋然性為證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的疫果因果關(guān)系學(xué)說為準(zhǔn)確認(rèn)定污染環(huán)境罪的因果關(guān)系提供了理論支撐。 污染環(huán)境罪的保護(hù)法益影響著污染環(huán)境罪的罪過形式。單一罪過形式僅能把污染環(huán)境罪的罪過形式界定為故意或過失，而不能同時(shí)包括故意和過失。通過對(duì)污染環(huán)境罪的保護(hù)法益和《刑法》第338條的文理分析，污染環(huán)境罪的罪過形式既包括故意也包括過失。因此，在污染環(huán)境罪的罪過形式上，應(yīng)當(dāng)提倡既包括故意又包括過失的混合罪過形式。 根據(jù)《刑法》第338條的規(guī)定，在污染環(huán)境罪的處罰上延續(xù)的是傳統(tǒng)的刑罰處罰方法，包括自由刑和罰金刑。其局限性主要表現(xiàn)為：刑罰種類單一、操作性差、處罰力度低等。新形勢(shì)下，為了實(shí)現(xiàn)對(duì)污染環(huán)境罪的有效處罰，應(yīng)當(dāng)擴(kuò)大刑罰幅度和提高罰金刑的可操作性；與此同時(shí)，應(yīng)當(dāng)根據(jù)污染環(huán)境罪保護(hù)法益的特殊性把傳統(tǒng)刑罰處罰方法和非刑罰處罰方法結(jié)合起來。
[Abstract]:Legal interest is closely related to interest, which is the dynamic reflection of interest in law. From the semantic point of view, legal interest refers to the legal interest enjoyed by the subject of legal interest, and its scope includes realistic interest and expected interest. The legal interests of the crime of polluting the environment, that is, the interests of the environment, are ecological, extensive and international; the environment refers to the natural environment and the social environment, the extension of which includes the ecological environment; the main body of the environmental interest is the natural person, In addition to legal persons and other organizations and countries, non-human beings are included to a certain extent; the content of environmental interests varies from environment to environment. The behavior of environmental pollution crime mainly includes environmental pollution behavior, water pollution behavior, air pollution behavior, marine pollution behavior, solid waste pollution behavior, The results included actual damage and dangerous results. The causality of environmental pollution crime poses a severe challenge to the traditional theory of causality in criminal law, because of its complexity, persistence, unpredictability and high technology. Therefore, the theory of causality of epidemic fruit based on high probability provides theoretical support for the accurate identification of causality of environmental pollution crime. The interests of the protection law of the crime of polluting the environment affect the form of the crime of pollution of the environment. A single form of crime can only define the crime of polluting the environment as intentional or negligent, but not both intentional and negligent. Through the analysis of the law of protection of the crime of pollution of the environment and the article 338 of the Criminal Law, it is found that the crime of pollution of the environment includes both intentional and negligent. Therefore, in the crime of pollution of the environment, we should advocate the mixed form of crime, which includes both intentional and negligent. According to Article 338 of the Criminal Law, the traditional punishment methods, including freedom penalty and fine penalty, continue in the punishment of environmental pollution crime. Its limitation mainly shows: the penalty type is single, the operation is poor, the punishment intensity is low. Under the new situation, in order to realize the effective punishment for the crime of polluting the environment, we should expand the scope of the penalty and improve the operability of the fine; at the same time, The traditional penalty method and the non-penalty method should be combined according to the particularity of the environmental pollution crime protection law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D924.36

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳君;;論疫學(xué)因果關(guān)系在污染環(huán)境罪中的適用[J];北京理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年06期

2 顏竟;鄒濤;;罪名與罪過形式對(duì)應(yīng)關(guān)系諸學(xué)說介評(píng)與新探[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年21期

3 王曉輝;;復(fù)合罪過的論理分析[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年18期

4 付立忠;試論游離常態(tài)的罪過形態(tài):混合罪過[J];公安大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2002年01期

5 陳冉;;論恢復(fù)正義理念在環(huán)境犯罪治理中的引入[J];河南警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2012年02期

6 胡春妮;;條件說之提倡[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年04期

7 栗相恩;;污染環(huán)境罪法益與罪過形式探析[J];人民檢察;2012年09期

8 周海浪;;污染環(huán)境罪的主觀責(zé)任探疑[J];人民司法;2012年23期

9 劉芝祥;;法益概念辨識(shí)[J];政法論壇;2008年04期

10 張明楷;;論表面的構(gòu)成要件要素[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2009年02期

本文編號(hào)：2145943