搶劫殺人行為數(shù)罪化研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-08-13 09:52
【摘要】：搶劫過程中發(fā)生殺人現(xiàn)象并不少見,搶劫而殺人的受刑法規(guī)范制裁,刑罰的裁量上大體一致,罪名上則有一罪與兩罪對待。這種在罪的認定或罪名宣告上的區(qū)別對待,在實務中難免引起疑慮。一般認為,出于多個犯意的數(shù)行為比出于一個犯意的一行為,更顯示出行為人對法的敵對。然而,搶劫殺人在罪責的事實評價上與理論并不吻合,一行為之搶劫殺人,更突顯行為人對法的敵對,在主觀上更具有非難可能性,應接受更重的罪與罰的評價。又,搶劫殺人在只剩一方行為人的情況下,如何認定其主觀,無非任由行為人之說辭,作此區(qū)分顯然并不適當。 搶劫罪名相對于其他財產(chǎn)侵害類犯罪,其危險性與危害性要求,行為人應當承受在這一行為下所實施危險行為所可能招致更重的罪責評價。從法益保護來看,相對于其他財產(chǎn)型犯罪,搶劫罪的強制行為手段直接指向被受害人,搶劫行為獨特的人身危險性,是區(qū)別于其他財產(chǎn)類犯罪的重要特征。搶劫罪名予以規(guī)范,并非不恰當,對搶劫時故意殺人行為進行立法上的評價也是必然選擇。然而,對生命法益的保護,故意殺人罪名可以提供充分的保護,搶劫規(guī)范來保護生命法益,并不顯得多高明,搶劫時故意殺人的情形對殺人行為并不顯得其特殊。所以在殺人罪名下進行評價和量刑可能更適當。 針對搶劫時的殺人現(xiàn)象,多數(shù)國家在刑法中明文以結果加重犯的形式規(guī)定“搶劫致人死亡”條款或以結合犯的形式規(guī)定“搶劫殺人”。這種規(guī)范形式并不僅僅限于將殺人作為搶劫手段的搶劫殺人。行為人在搶劫之際造成他人死傷的情況很多,為了對生命、身體進行特別保護,將搶劫過程中的殺人行為歸入搶劫罪名下規(guī)范,立法上做到了充分的保護。本文所論述之搶劫殺人,是指搶劫行為與殺人行為在時間、地點上相關聯(lián)的搶劫殺人,具體而言,先殺人后奪取財物,已奪取財物又殺人、再殺人,皆包括于內(nèi)。 在罪數(shù)問題上有評價之罪數(shù)與適用之罪數(shù)兩種理解,其目的皆為刑罰的實現(xiàn)。評價上之罪數(shù),屬于犯罪成立階段的問題,其意義在于犯罪評價上如何避免評價過�；蛟u價不足的現(xiàn)象。罪的認定對于罰的適用具有指導意義,搶劫殺人若為一罪,即適用“搶劫致人死亡”款項;若為數(shù)罪,則適用“殺人罪”與“搶劫罪”,或想象競合或實質(zhì)競合。有關其罪數(shù)上的評價其標準并不一致,有意思說、行為說、法益說、構成要件說。然,這些標準在罪數(shù)的認定上并不一致,也不能提供刑罰適用的決定性依據(jù)。就某一行為,并不能決定在適用刑法時其必須為一罪或數(shù)罪之規(guī)定。但通過明確犯罪個數(shù)的標準有益于犯罪成立本質(zhì)的理解,有利于刑法規(guī)范的認識。 搶劫殺人行為的法律效果,即為刑法目的的實現(xiàn),也是罪的評價意義所在,“無刑罰則無犯罪”。刑罰的適用主要是通過法條的解釋與適用,以期符合法律規(guī)定的目的。在法條的解釋上,以搶劫殺人是否可以作為搶劫罪的結果加重犯為最初解釋從而優(yōu)先適用。結合我國相關條文理解,搶劫殺人并不是刑法意義上的結果加重犯,而是一種法定刑升格情形。搶劫過程中的殺人行為也不是搶劫吸收殺人行為的法條競合,特別適用“搶劫致人死亡”款項,從而排斥殺人罪名的適用。最后,按照以犯意數(shù)決定行為數(shù)的傳統(tǒng)區(qū)分理論,對搶劫殺人行為做出一行為與兩行為的劃分。在罪的認定上以其侵犯兩個法益觸犯兩個罪名,成立兩個犯罪。在法律效果上,一行為成立兩個犯罪與兩行為成立兩個犯罪一樣,同樣可以適用兩個刑罰。從而在罪與罰上達到統(tǒng)一的認識與適用。 刑法立法所采用的是行為刑法,刑罰的決定不能不以犯罪行為的內(nèi)容以及評價為基礎。一并數(shù)罪并罰,符合“相同行為相同對待,不同行為不同對待”的公平原則。搶劫殺人行為在刑法規(guī)范上以殺人罪與搶劫罪數(shù)罪并罰,主觀上能夠實現(xiàn)罪責相當。實施搶劫殺人的行為人,可以預知其行為應當受搶劫罪名刑罰評價,也將受殺人罪名的刑罰評價,人民則從此種犯罪之性質(zhì),預知刑法將對搶劫行為、殺人行為予以禁止。在刑罰上,無論是從相對預防的觀點,還是從絕對的應報的觀點來看,觸犯數(shù)罪的刑罰也應該重于只犯搶劫罪的刑罰。 本選題的研究空間,主要在于罪數(shù)的評價標準較難把握,通過對搶劫殺人行為具體細致的分析,將有助于理論上的依據(jù)與實務相銜接,從而對罪質(zhì)與罪的處罰有合理的認識。
[Abstract]:Murder is not uncommon in the course of robbery. Murder by robbery is punished by the criminal law, the penalty is generally the same, the charges are treated as one crime and two crimes. However, the factual evaluation of robbery and homicide is not consistent with the theory. The robbery and homicide of one act highlights the hostility of the perpetrator to the law. Subjectively, it is more probable that the perpetrator is accused of crimes and punishments. Moreover, the robbery and homicide of one party is left to the perpetrator. In this case, it is obviously not appropriate to distinguish between the subjective and the arbitrary.
Compared with other crimes of property infringement, the crime of robbery is more dangerous and harmful, and the perpetrator should bear the risk that the dangerous act may cause more serious responsibility evaluation. Unique personal danger is an important characteristic distinguished from other property crimes. It is not inappropriate to regulate the charges of robbery, and it is inevitable to make legislative evaluation of intentional homicide in robbery. However, to protect the interests of life law, the charges of intentional homicide can provide adequate protection, and the norms of robbery can protect the interests of life law. It does not seem wise, and the case of intentional homicide in robbery does not seem to be specific to homicide, so it may be more appropriate to evaluate and sentence homicide.
In view of the homicide phenomenon during robbery, most countries stipulate the clause of "robbery causing death" in the form of aggravated consequential offense or "robbery and homicide" in the form of joint offense in criminal law. The robbery and homicide discussed in this paper refers to the robbery and homicide related to the time and place of the robbery and homicide, specifically, first killing and then seizing property. Capturing property and killing people and killing people are all inside.
The purpose of the two understandings of the number of crimes to be evaluated and the number of crimes to be applied is the realization of penalty. One crime, that is, the application of "robbery to death" funds; if the number of crimes, then the application of "homicide" and "robbery", or imaginary concurrence or substantive concurrence. The decisive basis for the application of penalty. As for an act, it can not be decided that it must be a crime or several crimes in the application of criminal law. However, it is beneficial to understand the nature of the establishment of a crime and to understand the norms of criminal law by defining the standard of the number of crimes.
The legal effect of robbery and homicide is the realization of the purpose of criminal law and the evaluation meaning of the crime. According to the understanding of the relevant provisions in our country, robbery and homicide is not a result of aggravated crime in the sense of criminal law, but a legal case of escalation of punishment. Finally, according to the traditional distinction theory that the number of acts is determined by the number of intentions, the author makes a distinction between one act and two acts of robbery and homicide. To apply two penalties, so as to achieve a unified understanding and application in crime and punishment.
The legislation of criminal law adopts behavioral criminal law, and the decision of penalty must be based on the content and evaluation of criminal acts. The combined punishment of several crimes conforms to the principle of "the same act is treated the same, different acts are treated differently". The perpetrator of robbery and homicide can be foreseen to be punished for robbery and to be punished for homicide. The people, according to the nature of the crime, predict that the criminal law will prohibit robbery and homicide. From the point of view of the newspaper, the penalty for committing a number of crimes should also be heavier than the penalty for committing robbery.
The research space of this topic mainly lies in the difficulty in grasping the evaluation criteria of the number of crimes. Through the detailed analysis of robbery and homicide, it will be helpful to link up the theoretical basis with practice, and thus have a reasonable understanding of the nature of the crime and the punishment of the crime.
【學位授予單位】：南京師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.1
本文編號：2180627
[Abstract]:Murder is not uncommon in the course of robbery. Murder by robbery is punished by the criminal law, the penalty is generally the same, the charges are treated as one crime and two crimes. However, the factual evaluation of robbery and homicide is not consistent with the theory. The robbery and homicide of one act highlights the hostility of the perpetrator to the law. Subjectively, it is more probable that the perpetrator is accused of crimes and punishments. Moreover, the robbery and homicide of one party is left to the perpetrator. In this case, it is obviously not appropriate to distinguish between the subjective and the arbitrary.
Compared with other crimes of property infringement, the crime of robbery is more dangerous and harmful, and the perpetrator should bear the risk that the dangerous act may cause more serious responsibility evaluation. Unique personal danger is an important characteristic distinguished from other property crimes. It is not inappropriate to regulate the charges of robbery, and it is inevitable to make legislative evaluation of intentional homicide in robbery. However, to protect the interests of life law, the charges of intentional homicide can provide adequate protection, and the norms of robbery can protect the interests of life law. It does not seem wise, and the case of intentional homicide in robbery does not seem to be specific to homicide, so it may be more appropriate to evaluate and sentence homicide.
In view of the homicide phenomenon during robbery, most countries stipulate the clause of "robbery causing death" in the form of aggravated consequential offense or "robbery and homicide" in the form of joint offense in criminal law. The robbery and homicide discussed in this paper refers to the robbery and homicide related to the time and place of the robbery and homicide, specifically, first killing and then seizing property. Capturing property and killing people and killing people are all inside.
The purpose of the two understandings of the number of crimes to be evaluated and the number of crimes to be applied is the realization of penalty. One crime, that is, the application of "robbery to death" funds; if the number of crimes, then the application of "homicide" and "robbery", or imaginary concurrence or substantive concurrence. The decisive basis for the application of penalty. As for an act, it can not be decided that it must be a crime or several crimes in the application of criminal law. However, it is beneficial to understand the nature of the establishment of a crime and to understand the norms of criminal law by defining the standard of the number of crimes.
The legal effect of robbery and homicide is the realization of the purpose of criminal law and the evaluation meaning of the crime. According to the understanding of the relevant provisions in our country, robbery and homicide is not a result of aggravated crime in the sense of criminal law, but a legal case of escalation of punishment. Finally, according to the traditional distinction theory that the number of acts is determined by the number of intentions, the author makes a distinction between one act and two acts of robbery and homicide. To apply two penalties, so as to achieve a unified understanding and application in crime and punishment.
The legislation of criminal law adopts behavioral criminal law, and the decision of penalty must be based on the content and evaluation of criminal acts. The combined punishment of several crimes conforms to the principle of "the same act is treated the same, different acts are treated differently". The perpetrator of robbery and homicide can be foreseen to be punished for robbery and to be punished for homicide. The people, according to the nature of the crime, predict that the criminal law will prohibit robbery and homicide. From the point of view of the newspaper, the penalty for committing a number of crimes should also be heavier than the penalty for committing robbery.
The research space of this topic mainly lies in the difficulty in grasping the evaluation criteria of the number of crimes. Through the detailed analysis of robbery and homicide, it will be helpful to link up the theoretical basis with practice, and thus have a reasonable understanding of the nature of the crime and the punishment of the crime.
【學位授予單位】：南京師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.1
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前10條
1 陸詩忠;;我國罪數(shù)理論之基本問題研究[J];法律科學(西北政法學院學報);2007年02期
2 陳興良;;法條競合的學術演進——一個學術史的考察[J];法律科學(西北政法大學學報);2011年04期
3 金澤剛;搶劫殺人案的定性問題[J];法律適用;2000年09期
4 陳洪兵;;搶劫殺人的應定故意殺人罪[J];法律適用;2007年08期
5 王尚文,王婧華;論“搶劫致人重傷、死亡”[J];中國人民公安大學學報;2003年03期
6 馬榮春;;刑法的可能性:預測可能性[J];法律科學(西北政法大學學報);2013年01期
7 郭莉;;結果加重犯本質(zhì)探究[J];河北法學;2010年05期
8 陳興良;刑罰目的新論[J];華東政法學院學報;2001年03期
9 周少華;罪刑法定與刑法機能之關系[J];法學研究;2005年03期
10 陳洪兵;;“致人重傷、死亡”類型化研究[J];蘭州學刊;2012年03期
，本文編號：2180627
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2180627.html
