【摘要】：近年來(lái),“見(jiàn)危不救”事件頻頻出現(xiàn),見(jiàn)危不救造成了嚴(yán)重的危害后果和惡劣的社會(huì)影響,社會(huì)道德底線受到嚴(yán)重沖撞,見(jiàn)危不救應(yīng)否承擔(dān)法律責(zé)任的問(wèn)題,在我國(guó)引起了強(qiáng)烈關(guān)注。學(xué)術(shù)界有很多法學(xué)家們都提出建議見(jiàn)危不救行為應(yīng)納入到刑法規(guī)制的范疇;在多年的全國(guó)人大代表會(huì)議上,有多名人大代表多次提出了增設(shè)“見(jiàn)危不救罪”的立法議案;早在我國(guó)古代很多個(gè)朝代都有見(jiàn)危不救的相關(guān)立法,而在國(guó)外的一些國(guó)家如法國(guó)、德國(guó)、意大利等國(guó)家見(jiàn)危不救的立法已相當(dāng)成熟。針對(duì)我國(guó)目前沒(méi)有見(jiàn)危不救刑事立法的現(xiàn)狀,而一系列的案例告訴我們,見(jiàn)危不救的“看客”們?cè)絹?lái)越多,社會(huì)道德滑坡和淪喪現(xiàn)象越來(lái)越嚴(yán)重,僅僅從道德上來(lái)唾罵譴責(zé)已不能很好地解決日趨突出的矛盾,再不加用法律手段來(lái)規(guī)制,中國(guó)幾千年來(lái)的道德文明必將毀掉,這絕不是小事,不容小覷。在此基礎(chǔ)上,本文先從一組見(jiàn)危不救的案例引出思考,再?gòu)囊?jiàn)危不救的涵義入手,分析見(jiàn)危不救入刑的必要性及可行性,通過(guò)比較分析法對(duì)見(jiàn)危不救罪立法展開(kāi)研究。本文加上引言共分為五個(gè)部分,具體內(nèi)容如下:首先在引言部分例舉了幾個(gè)十分有代表性的見(jiàn)危不救的案例,引出道德與法律之爭(zhēng),點(diǎn)出有關(guān)見(jiàn)危不救在我國(guó)刑事立法上屬空白區(qū)域,提出立法所要面臨的問(wèn)題,確定本文要研究見(jiàn)危不救入刑的主題。正文的第一部分對(duì)見(jiàn)危不救行為進(jìn)行概述,介紹見(jiàn)危不救的定義,見(jiàn)危不救的類型和表現(xiàn)形式及出現(xiàn)的原因,同時(shí)介紹我國(guó)學(xué)者對(duì)見(jiàn)危不救是否入刑的不同觀點(diǎn),并提出筆者贊成見(jiàn)危不救入刑的觀點(diǎn)。正文第二部分主要是論證見(jiàn)危不救入刑的必要性和可行性,必要性從明確見(jiàn)危不救行為的社會(huì)危害性,指出見(jiàn)危不救行為具有普遍性,和現(xiàn)實(shí)需要的緊迫性來(lái)論證;可行性從法理學(xué)中法的價(jià)值、法與正義、人權(quán)、秩序、法與社會(huì)、道德等找到可行的法理依據(jù),再?gòu)男谭ㄖt抑性來(lái)分析,最后認(rèn)為司法困局不應(yīng)成為見(jiàn)危不救的障礙,具有可行性。正文第三部分主要是通過(guò)例舉的方式介紹我國(guó)古代見(jiàn)危不救的立法規(guī)定及國(guó)外見(jiàn)危不救的立法規(guī)定,及我國(guó)現(xiàn)行的立法狀況,點(diǎn)明見(jiàn)危不救入刑有跡可循,有立法經(jīng)驗(yàn)借鑒。正文第四部分著重分析見(jiàn)危不救罪的構(gòu)成要件,分別從主體、主觀方面、客體和客觀方面四個(gè)方面詳細(xì)分析,并通過(guò)借鑒國(guó)外立法確定罪名、對(duì)比國(guó)內(nèi)相似立法確定法定刑,設(shè)計(jì)出見(jiàn)危不救罪的完整法條。
[Abstract]:In recent years, there have been frequent incidents of "seeing danger or not saving", which has caused serious harmful consequences and adverse social effects. The bottom line of social morality has been seriously collided, and the question of whether or not to bear legal responsibility for failure to save is a problem. It has aroused strong concern in our country. In academic circles, many jurists have proposed that the act of not rescuing from danger should be included in the scope of criminal law regulation; at the National people's Congress Congress for many years, many deputies to the National people's Congress have put forward several legislative bills to add "see danger not to save crime"; As early as many dynasties in ancient China, there is no rescue legislation, but in some foreign countries such as France, Germany, Italy and other countries to see no rescue legislation has been quite mature. In view of the fact that there is no criminal legislation in our country at present, a series of cases tell us that there are more and more "spectators" who see danger and do not save, and the phenomenon of social moral decline and loss is becoming more and more serious. Just from the moral point of view scolding and denouncing can not solve the increasingly prominent contradiction, no more legal means to regulate, China's thousands of years of moral civilization will be destroyed, this is no small matter, should not be underestimated. On this basis, this paper first from a group of cases of danger not to save the thinking, and then from the meaning of not saving, analysis of the necessity and feasibility of seeing danger not to save the punishment, through comparative analysis of the crime of seeing danger not to save the legislation to begin research. This article plus the introduction is divided into five parts, the specific contents are as follows: first of all, in the introduction, I cite a few representative cases, leading to the moral and legal disputes. This paper points out the blank area in our country's criminal legislation, puts forward the problems to be faced by the legislation, and determines the theme of this paper. The first part of the text summarizes the behavior of seeing danger and not saving, introduces the definition, types, manifestations and causes of the failure to save, and introduces the different views of Chinese scholars on whether to see danger or not. And put forward that the author agreed to see danger do not save the point of view. The second part of the text is mainly to demonstrate the necessity and feasibility of seeing danger and not saving the punishment. The necessity is demonstrated from the social harmfulness of the behavior of seeing danger and not saving, and points out that the act of seeing danger and not saving is universal, and the urgency of reality needs to demonstrate. The feasibility is analyzed from the value of law in jurisprudence, law and justice, human rights, order, law and society, morality and so on, and then analyzed from the modesty of criminal law. It is feasible. The third part of the text mainly introduces the legislative provisions of our country in ancient times and the legislative provisions of foreign countries, and the current legislative situation of our country, and points out that there are signs to be followed and legislative experience to be used for reference. The fourth part of the text focuses on the analysis of the constitutive elements of the crime of failure to save danger, respectively from the subject, subjective, objective and objective aspects of the four aspects of detailed analysis, and through the use of foreign legislation to determine the charges, compared with similar domestic legislation to determine the statutory punishment. Design the complete law that sees danger does not save crime.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣西師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D924.3

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李光輝,董玉光;關(guān)于見(jiàn)危不救的刑法學(xué)思考[J];西南師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2004年06期

2 向朝霞;;一個(gè)平庸的惡:見(jiàn)危不救的原因及其規(guī)制[J];云南行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年01期

3 方也媛;;見(jiàn)危不救犯罪化探析[J];長(zhǎng)春金融高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

4 王衛(wèi)軍;;“牽尸要價(jià)”事件與見(jiàn)危不救助罪的思考[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年01期

5 李進(jìn)平;;“見(jiàn)危不救”的刑法治理[J];重慶科技學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年10期

6 盧家玉;;夫妻之間見(jiàn)危不救問(wèn)題研究[J];中外企業(yè)家;2011年04期

7 宋博納;;從義務(wù)角度透視見(jiàn)危不救中旁觀者的不作為侵權(quán)責(zé)任[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(中旬);2012年02期

8 李宏杰;;淺論對(duì)“見(jiàn)危不救”行為的刑法評(píng)價(jià)問(wèn)題[J];法制與社會(huì);2012年10期

9 陳立冬;;社會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)型期下的見(jiàn)危不救立法探究[J];法制與社會(huì);2012年09期

10 呂凱;張兆玲;;見(jiàn)危不救立法問(wèn)題研究——由小悅悅事件引發(fā)的法律思考[J];天津法學(xué);2012年02期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 左堅(jiān)衛(wèi)　劉志偉;法律如何規(guī)制見(jiàn)危不救行為[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2003年

2 吳學(xué)兵;見(jiàn)危不救有說(shuō)法[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2000年

3 付立慶;“見(jiàn)危不救”的合理應(yīng)答[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2003年

4 中國(guó)社科院法學(xué)所刑法室主任 研究員 劉仁文;“見(jiàn)危不救”到底該不該入刑[N];文匯報(bào);2011年

5 周占生 洛陽(yáng)師范學(xué)院政法學(xué)院;“見(jiàn)危不救”入刑的法理解析[N];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)報(bào);2012年

6 陳杰人;道德與法律：混合只會(huì)糟糕[N];廠長(zhǎng)經(jīng)理日?qǐng)?bào);2001年

7 文今;社會(huì)無(wú)恙,需要制度設(shè)計(jì)[N];成都日?qǐng)?bào);2011年

8 記者 伍仞;多位專家不贊成“見(jiàn)危不救”入罪[N];廣州日?qǐng)?bào);2011年

9 本報(bào)記者 宋安明;“見(jiàn)死不救”罪與非罪[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2001年

10 鄧海建;謹(jǐn)防道德問(wèn)題泛法律化[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2004年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王碩;利他救助法律干預(yù)研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2017年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 宋文遠(yuǎn);論見(jiàn)危不救法律制度探究[D];蘭州大學(xué);2011年

2 武挪強(qiáng);見(jiàn)危不救的法規(guī)范認(rèn)知[D];湖南大學(xué);2007年

3 王余波;崇州見(jiàn)危不救案件的分析與思考[D];蘭州大學(xué);2008年

4 王曉涵;“見(jiàn)危不救”之法理學(xué)思考[D];遼寧師范大學(xué);2011年

5 陳立冬;見(jiàn)危不救的立法問(wèn)題探究[D];廣西師范大學(xué);2012年

6 包立平;見(jiàn)危不救行為不宜入刑之分析[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

7 潘明輝;見(jiàn)危不救行為入刑研究[D];安徽大學(xué);2012年

8 何琦;見(jiàn)危不救應(yīng)否歸罪問(wèn)題研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

9 錢航;“見(jiàn)危不救”入刑問(wèn)題研究[D];南京大學(xué);2013年

10 劉泉;見(jiàn)危不救的法律對(duì)策[D];山東大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：2204348