轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪之既未遂研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-08-05 12:05
【摘要】：轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪是法律擬制的罪名，在司法實踐中一般參照普通搶劫罪定罪處罰。由于法律未明確規(guī)定轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪的既未遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，于是為刑法學(xué)界研究本罪的既未遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)留下余地。分析轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪之既未遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)必須在本罪成立的基礎(chǔ)之上進(jìn)行，只有明確罪與非罪才談得上既遂與未遂，所以對本罪犯罪主體的界定、暴力脅迫的認(rèn)定直接影響既未遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的確立。 本文第一個部分從事實層面分析，發(fā)現(xiàn)轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪既遂與未遂的認(rèn)定存在兩個難點。第一、犯罪主體。《關(guān)于審理搶劫、搶奪刑事案件適用法律若干問題的意見》規(guī)定，行為人實施盜竊等行為，未達(dá)到“數(shù)額較大”，為窩藏贓物、抗拒抓捕或者毀滅罪證而當(dāng)場使用暴力脅迫，致人輕微傷以上后果的，構(gòu)成轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪。換言之，行為人盜竊、搶奪、詐騙“數(shù)額較小”的財物，為窩藏贓物等而當(dāng)場使用嚴(yán)重的暴力脅迫，如果未造成被害人受傷的結(jié)果，就不構(gòu)成轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪；第二、犯罪行為。純粹的語言脅迫（例如：出言恐嚇，你敢攔我，我用刀捅你）、輕微地推搡抓扯并未造成輕傷及以上傷害（例如：被害人曾某抓住行為人馬某手不放，，馬某便拼命掙扎并將曾某左手咬傷）等情形在案例中被認(rèn)定為轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪，這樣的理解是欠妥的。犯罪主體和行為的界定直接影響既未遂的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，所以本文采用身份犯說化解了難點一，并結(jié)合日本、我國臺灣地區(qū)學(xué)者對暴力脅迫程度的分類以及大陸司法實踐中具體案件情況，總結(jié)得出與轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪罪責(zé)相適應(yīng)的暴力脅迫定義，化解了難點二。即：暴力是達(dá)到抑制人的反抗之程度的有形力，脅迫是使人明顯難以抗拒。 本文第二部分理論層面辨析了轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪的六種既未遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，并逐一闡釋各個觀點存在的缺陷。從更有利于保護(hù)財產(chǎn)權(quán)利和人身權(quán)利的角度出發(fā)，認(rèn)定準(zhǔn)搶劫罪的既未遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是：具備劫取財物或者造成他人輕傷以上后果兩者之一的，均屬準(zhǔn)搶劫罪之既遂形態(tài)；既未劫得財物，又未造成他人人身傷害后果的，屬準(zhǔn)搶劫罪之未遂形態(tài)。但是，此觀點存在一定的缺陷,如果暴力脅迫是實行行為之著手，那么本罪之既未遂判斷便早于實行行為出現(xiàn)；如果盜竊等行為是實行行為之著手，此時又不存在類似于普通搶劫罪的危險性。 為了避免這種尷尬的局面，本文第三、四部分從犯罪構(gòu)成的角度提出對轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪既未遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的完善意見。轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪的犯罪主體是具備盜竊、詐騙或搶奪之故意，而已著手于盜竊、詐騙或搶奪行為之實行者，并從學(xué)理上論證了身份犯學(xué)說用于此問題的合理性。關(guān)于轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪的實行行為，則必須將盜竊等前行為看作“潛在的實行行為”，事后基于法定目的而為暴力脅迫，只是在結(jié)果上成為本罪的實行行為。簡而言之，所有的盜竊等行為都有轉(zhuǎn)換為準(zhǔn)搶劫罪的可能性，盜竊等行為是準(zhǔn)搶劫罪的“潛在實行行為”。關(guān)于實行行為的著手時期，則根據(jù)事后的溯及評價說，從事前判斷有危險的行為是潛在的實行行為，到事后判斷具體的危險發(fā)生時，溯及的將潛在的實行行為轉(zhuǎn)化為現(xiàn)實的實行行為。
[Abstract]:The crime of transformation robbery is the crime of legal system. In the judicial practice, it is generally referred to the convictions of ordinary robbery. Because the law does not specify the standard of attempted robbery, it leaves the room for the attempted standard of the crime in the criminal law field. On the basis of the basis, only the crime and the non crime can be clearly defined and attempted, so the definition of the subject of the crime and the determination of the coercion of violence have a direct influence on the establishment of the standard of attempted crime.
The first part of this article, from the factual analysis, finds that there are two difficulties in the identification of accomplished and attempted robbery. First, the subject of a crime. < opinion > about a number of questions about the application of the law to the trial of robbery and the robbery of criminal cases, the behavior of the perpetrator to carry out the theft and so on, which has not reached a "large amount", in order to hide the stolen goods and resist arrest or In other words, the crime of stealing, snatching, and swindling "small amount" of the property, in other words, is to use serious violence to hide the stolen goods and so on. If it does not cause the result of the injured person, it does not constitute the crime of transformation type robbery; Two, criminal act. Pure language coercion (for example: words intimidating, you dare to stop me, I stab you with a knife), a slight push and a shove that does not cause minor injuries or injury (for example: the victim once caught a certain hand, the horse struggles and a left hand bites) in a case of transformed robbery in a case. This kind of understanding is inappropriate. The definition of the subject and behavior of the crime has a direct influence on the standard of judgement. Therefore, this article uses the identity crime to resolve the difficulties, and combines Japan, the classification of the degree of violence and the specific cases in the judicial practice of the mainland of China in Taiwan, and sums up the responsibility for the crime of transformation type robbery. Adaptive definition of coercion of violence has solved the difficulty two. That is, violence is a physical force which can restrain people's resistance, and coercion is obviously difficult to resist.
The second part of this paper distinguishes the six unaccomplished standards of the crime of transformed robbery, and explains the defects of each viewpoint one by one. From the point of view that is more conducive to the protection of property rights and personal rights, the unaccomplished standard of the crime of quasi robbery is identified as one of the two consequences of robbing of property or causing light injury to others. It belongs to the accomplished form of the crime of quasi robbery; it is the attempted form of the crime of quasi robbery, which has neither robbed the property nor caused the consequences of the personal injury of others. However, there is a certain defect in this view. If the coercion is the start of the practice, then the attempted judgment of the crime is earlier than the practice of the act; if the theft and other acts are true At the same time, there is no danger similar to ordinary robbery.
In order to avoid this embarrassing situation, the third, fourth part of this article, from the angle of the constitution of the crime, puts forward the perfect opinions on the attempted standard of the crime of transformation robbery. The subject of the crime of transforming the crime of robbery is the intentional of theft, fraud or snatching. The doctrine of criminal offense is used to the rationality of this problem. As to the practice of transforming the crime of robbery, the former acts of theft, such as theft, must be regarded as "potential practice", and then based on the statutory purpose of violence coercion, only in the result of the act of the crime. In short, all the theft and other acts have been converted to quasi robbery. The possibility, theft and other acts are the "potential action" of the crime of quasi robbery. In the beginning of the practice, according to the retroactivity of the post, it is a potential practice to judge the dangerous behavior before the judgment, and to judge the specific danger after the event, and turn the potential practice into practical practice.
【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】：D924.35
本文編號：2165745
[Abstract]:The crime of transformation robbery is the crime of legal system. In the judicial practice, it is generally referred to the convictions of ordinary robbery. Because the law does not specify the standard of attempted robbery, it leaves the room for the attempted standard of the crime in the criminal law field. On the basis of the basis, only the crime and the non crime can be clearly defined and attempted, so the definition of the subject of the crime and the determination of the coercion of violence have a direct influence on the establishment of the standard of attempted crime.
The first part of this article, from the factual analysis, finds that there are two difficulties in the identification of accomplished and attempted robbery. First, the subject of a crime. < opinion > about a number of questions about the application of the law to the trial of robbery and the robbery of criminal cases, the behavior of the perpetrator to carry out the theft and so on, which has not reached a "large amount", in order to hide the stolen goods and resist arrest or In other words, the crime of stealing, snatching, and swindling "small amount" of the property, in other words, is to use serious violence to hide the stolen goods and so on. If it does not cause the result of the injured person, it does not constitute the crime of transformation type robbery; Two, criminal act. Pure language coercion (for example: words intimidating, you dare to stop me, I stab you with a knife), a slight push and a shove that does not cause minor injuries or injury (for example: the victim once caught a certain hand, the horse struggles and a left hand bites) in a case of transformed robbery in a case. This kind of understanding is inappropriate. The definition of the subject and behavior of the crime has a direct influence on the standard of judgement. Therefore, this article uses the identity crime to resolve the difficulties, and combines Japan, the classification of the degree of violence and the specific cases in the judicial practice of the mainland of China in Taiwan, and sums up the responsibility for the crime of transformation type robbery. Adaptive definition of coercion of violence has solved the difficulty two. That is, violence is a physical force which can restrain people's resistance, and coercion is obviously difficult to resist.
The second part of this paper distinguishes the six unaccomplished standards of the crime of transformed robbery, and explains the defects of each viewpoint one by one. From the point of view that is more conducive to the protection of property rights and personal rights, the unaccomplished standard of the crime of quasi robbery is identified as one of the two consequences of robbing of property or causing light injury to others. It belongs to the accomplished form of the crime of quasi robbery; it is the attempted form of the crime of quasi robbery, which has neither robbed the property nor caused the consequences of the personal injury of others. However, there is a certain defect in this view. If the coercion is the start of the practice, then the attempted judgment of the crime is earlier than the practice of the act; if the theft and other acts are true At the same time, there is no danger similar to ordinary robbery.
In order to avoid this embarrassing situation, the third, fourth part of this article, from the angle of the constitution of the crime, puts forward the perfect opinions on the attempted standard of the crime of transformation robbery. The subject of the crime of transforming the crime of robbery is the intentional of theft, fraud or snatching. The doctrine of criminal offense is used to the rationality of this problem. As to the practice of transforming the crime of robbery, the former acts of theft, such as theft, must be regarded as "potential practice", and then based on the statutory purpose of violence coercion, only in the result of the act of the crime. In short, all the theft and other acts have been converted to quasi robbery. The possibility, theft and other acts are the "potential action" of the crime of quasi robbery. In the beginning of the practice, according to the retroactivity of the post, it is a potential practice to judge the dangerous behavior before the judgment, and to judge the specific danger after the event, and turn the potential practice into practical practice.
【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】：D924.35
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 于沛霖;魏悅?cè)?;轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪的認(rèn)定[J];大連海事大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2006年02期
2 林必金;對刑法轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪條文的反思與重構(gòu)[J];法律適用;2003年06期
3 薛進(jìn)展;轉(zhuǎn)化犯基本問題新論[J];法學(xué);2004年10期
4 鄭澤善;;轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪新探[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2013年02期
5 龍洋;;論轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪的既遂與未遂形態(tài)——從法律擬制的視角[J];河北法學(xué);2009年06期
6 武化吉;柏浪濤;;轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪共犯及既未遂的認(rèn)定[J];中國檢察官;2007年01期
7 陳凌;論事后搶劫的既遂與未遂[J];人民檢察;2005年21期
8 王世斌;;轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪不應(yīng)存在未遂形態(tài)[J];人民檢察;2007年16期
9 楊志國;;轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪的未遂形態(tài)及判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[J];人民檢察;2010年07期
10 王永杰;;轉(zhuǎn)化犯若干問題探析——以轉(zhuǎn)化型搶劫罪為視角[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報;2006年03期
本文編號：2165745
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2165745.html
教材專著
