發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-08-09 14:34

【摘要】：“緊急時(shí)無(wú)法律”這一古老的格言早已為法律人所熟知，在多數(shù)國(guó)家的刑法規(guī)范中也能尋覓到緊急避險(xiǎn)的身影。但事實(shí)上有關(guān)緊急避險(xiǎn)爭(zhēng)點(diǎn)依然很多，尤其是關(guān)于生命型緊急避險(xiǎn)。所謂生命型緊急避險(xiǎn)，是指為了保護(hù)本人或者他人的生命權(quán)免受正在發(fā)生的危險(xiǎn)，不得已給第三方較小或者同等的生命權(quán)造成損害的行為。損害生命權(quán)的緊急避險(xiǎn)屬于違法阻卻事由。其原因在于：符合法秩序的內(nèi)在要求；社會(huì)法利益整體平衡；彰顯法律正義價(jià)值；尊重人性；更有利保障生命法益。允許對(duì)生命權(quán)實(shí)施緊急避險(xiǎn)的理論根據(jù)是：法律不強(qiáng)人所難；法律上個(gè)人保留條款；社會(huì)連帶義務(wù)理論；法律正義；生命作為手段加以衡量的規(guī)范事實(shí)等。生命型緊急避險(xiǎn)有其成立的特定條件，，在避險(xiǎn)起因、避險(xiǎn)意圖、避險(xiǎn)對(duì)象、避險(xiǎn)限度、避險(xiǎn)主體等方面與一般的緊急避險(xiǎn)不同。保護(hù)多數(shù)生命時(shí)生命型緊急避險(xiǎn)的成立條件與保護(hù)同等生命權(quán)的生命型緊急避險(xiǎn)的成立條件有所不同。后者需要考慮是否存在降低自身法律保護(hù)的因素、被害人確定程序是否正當(dāng)、是否實(shí)現(xiàn)了個(gè)人本位和社會(huì)本位的統(tǒng)一等條件。
[Abstract]:The old maxim "there is no law in time of emergency" has long been well known to law people, and can also be found in the criminal law norms of most countries. But the truth is that there are still plenty of arguments about emergency risk aversion, especially about life-type emergency havens. The so-called life-type emergency risk avoidance refers to the act of harming a third party's smaller or equivalent right to life in order to protect the right to life of one person or another person from an ongoing danger. The urgent risk of harming the right to life is an illegal cause of obstruction. The reasons are: accord with the inherent requirements of the legal order; balance the interests of the social law; highlight the value of legal justice; respect human nature; more conducive to the protection of life legal interests. The theoretical basis of allowing the implementation of the right to life is as follows: the law does not force people to do whatever they want; the personal reservation clause in law; the theory of social joint and several obligations; legal justice; and the normative facts that life is measured as a means, and so on. There are special conditions for life type emergency risk avoidance, which is different from general emergency risk avoidance in such aspects as the cause, intention, object, limit and subject of risk. The establishment conditions of life type emergency risk protection are different from those of life type emergency risk protection with the same right of life. The latter needs to consider whether there are factors to reduce their own legal protection, whether the victim determines whether the procedure is proper or not, and whether the unity of individual standard and social standard is realized.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D914

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 趙擁軍;;在規(guī)則沖突中尋求生命權(quán)緊急避險(xiǎn)的支撐——以“大多數(shù)”語(yǔ)境下的行為功利主義為標(biāo)尺[J];安徽廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年01期

2 董為;梅傳強(qiáng);;以緊急避險(xiǎn)本質(zhì)為視角對(duì)緊急避險(xiǎn)理論的探討[J];西華師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年05期

3 賀曉東;;修正的肯定說(shuō)之確立——試論對(duì)生命的緊急避險(xiǎn)[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年16期

4 杜文忠;生命的權(quán)力——一個(gè)緊急避險(xiǎn)案例的法理學(xué)分析[J];貴州警官職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年02期

5 張健一;;論緊急避險(xiǎn)的法律性質(zhì)[J];重慶理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué));2012年11期

6 彭文華;;緊急避險(xiǎn)限度的適當(dāng)性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[J];法學(xué);2013年03期

7 王永茜;;論現(xiàn)代刑法擴(kuò)張的新手段——法益保護(hù)的提前化和刑事處罰的前置化[J];法學(xué)雜志;2013年06期

8 馬榮春;周建達(dá);;緊急避險(xiǎn)權(quán)益對(duì)等肯定論[J];河海大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年04期

9 黃明儒;論緊急避險(xiǎn)的概念與本質(zhì)屬性[J];華僑大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年02期

10 王剛;;營(yíng)救者的損害與自我答責(zé)原則[J];法學(xué)研究;2010年03期

本文編號(hào)：2174387