【摘要】：聚眾斗毆罪被規(guī)定在《中華人民共和國刑法》第二百九十二條,并且僅作了十分簡單的規(guī)定,而關(guān)于此罪的客觀構(gòu)成要件應(yīng)該如何認(rèn)定,并無具體描述,張明楷教授將其定義為聚集多人攻擊對方身體或者相互攻擊對方身體的行為;同時由于缺乏相關(guān)司法解釋,各地頒布的有關(guān)此罪的《紀(jì)要》及其他規(guī)范性意見也不充分全面,因此,學(xué)界關(guān)于此罪的基本犯罪構(gòu)成認(rèn)定、行為構(gòu)造、加重情節(jié)司法認(rèn)定及致人重傷死亡這一轉(zhuǎn)化條款認(rèn)定等問題一直都有許多不同見解,同時,在司法實踐中此罪也是較為疑難的問題。有鑒于此,筆者闡述了當(dāng)前較具代表意義的學(xué)者的相關(guān)意見和具體實踐中司法機關(guān)的觀點,同時對這些意見觀點作了深入分析,提出了自己對這些問題的看法,以期為解決這些難題盡一份綿薄之力。文章分為四個部分:第一個部分是聚眾斗毆罪基本犯罪構(gòu)成客觀行為的認(rèn)定。在這個問題之下,筆者詳細(xì)分析了 "聚眾"和"斗毆"兩個客觀行為的內(nèi)涵,筆者看來"眾"意為單方人數(shù)為三人及以上,同意用單方人數(shù)作為標(biāo)準(zhǔn),而"聚眾"意為首要分子經(jīng)過策劃以后,為實現(xiàn)斗毆目的而集聚3人以上的活動。在"斗毆"的理解上,筆者分析了"斗毆無防衛(wèi)"的內(nèi)涵,以及"斗毆地點有無限制"這兩個問題。第二個部分是聚眾斗毆罪行為構(gòu)造問題。對于這個問題,學(xué)界大致存在如下不同意見:第一,復(fù)合行為說;第二,單一行為說。筆者贊同單行為說,認(rèn)為本罪的實行行為只有"斗毆","聚眾"并不是,并詳細(xì)地闡述了理由。第三個部分是聚眾斗毆罪加重情節(jié)司法認(rèn)定問題。我國《刑法》明確了關(guān)于此罪的四種加重情節(jié),筆者對這四種情形進行了分析,如"多次聚眾斗毆"中的"多次"應(yīng)該如何認(rèn)定;何為"人數(shù)多"、"規(guī)模大"及"社會影響惡劣",這三個條件在認(rèn)定過程中所起的作用是否相同;何為"械",何為"持械",如果在斗毆過程中只有一方持械,應(yīng)怎樣認(rèn)定,如果僅一方中部分人持械,此時又應(yīng)怎樣認(rèn)定,筆者都進行了詳細(xì)的闡述,并提出了自己的看法。第四個部分是聚眾斗毆致人重傷、死亡的認(rèn)定研究。我國《刑法》第二百九十二條規(guī)定了聚眾斗毆罪的轉(zhuǎn)化條款。在第四部分,筆者先闡述了自己對此轉(zhuǎn)化條款的基本看法,筆者認(rèn)為,成立轉(zhuǎn)化犯的前提是行為已經(jīng)成立聚眾斗毆罪,未具備這個前提便不會進行轉(zhuǎn)化。以此為基礎(chǔ),筆者對轉(zhuǎn)化主體的范圍作出了界定,筆者看來,全案轉(zhuǎn)化說和部分轉(zhuǎn)化說不可取,并闡述了理由。此外,還分析了"致人重傷、死亡"中"人"的具體界限,在筆者看來,對方因受擊打而受重傷或死亡的人應(yīng)當(dāng)在"人"的界限之內(nèi),但實踐中的一些特殊情形需作出區(qū)分再處理,并作出了分析。
[Abstract]:The crime of affray is stipulated in Article 292 of the Criminal Law of the people's Republic of China, and it is only stipulated in a very simple way. However, there is no specific description as to how the objective elements of the crime should be identified. Professor Zhang Mingkai defined it as the act of gathering a number of people to attack each other's body or attacking each other's body. At the same time, due to the lack of relevant judicial explanations, the minutes and other normative opinions issued by various localities on this crime are also not sufficiently comprehensive. Therefore, there are many different opinions about the basic crime constitution, the behavior structure, the judicial cognizance of aggravating circumstances and the confirmation of the transforming clause of causing serious injury and death in the academic circles, and at the same time, In judicial practice, this crime is also a more difficult problem. In view of this, the author expounds the relevant opinions of the scholars with representative significance at present and the views of the judicial organs in concrete practice, and at the same time makes an in-depth analysis of these views, and puts forward his own views on these issues. In order to solve these problems to make a modest contribution. The article is divided into four parts: the first part is the identification of the basic crime of affray as an objective act. Under this problem, the author analyzes the connotation of "gathering crowd" and "brawl" in detail. It seems to me that "crowd" means that the number of one party is three or more, and agrees to use the number of unilateral parties as the standard. The "crowd" means that the ringleader, after planning, to achieve the purpose of the fight and gather more than 3 activities. On the understanding of "brawl", the author analyzes the connotation of "affray without defense" and the question of whether the place of brawl is restricted or not. The second part is the behavior structure of the crime of affray. There are different opinions about this problem: first, the theory of compound behavior; second, the theory of single behavior. The author agrees with the theory of "single act", and thinks that the crime is only "affray", "gathering the crowd" is not, and expounds the reason in detail. The third part is the problem of judicial cognizance of aggravation of affray crime. The Criminal Law of our country clarifies the four aggravating circumstances of this crime, and the author analyzes the four situations, such as how to identify the "multiple times" in "multiple fights"; What are "large numbers", "large scale" and "bad social impact"? are these three conditions playing the same role in the determination process; what is "armed" and what is "armed"; if only one party is armed in the course of a fight, how should it be determined? If only some of them are armed, how should they be determined at this time, I have elaborated in detail and put forward my own views. The fourth part is the research on the identification of serious injury and death caused by affray. Article 292 of our country's Criminal Law stipulates the transforming clause of the crime of affray. In the fourth part, the author first expounds his basic views on the transformation clause. The author thinks that the premise of establishing the transforming crime is that the behavior has already established the crime of affray among the masses, and if it does not have this premise, it will not be transformed. On the basis of this, the author defines the scope of the subject of transformation. The author thinks that the theory of whole case transformation and the theory of partial transformation are not desirable, and expounds the reasons. In addition, the author also analyzes the specific boundaries of "person" in "causing serious injury and death". In the author's opinion, the person who was seriously injured or died as a result of being hit by the other side should fall within the boundary of "person". However, some special cases in practice need to be differentiated and reprocessed and analyzed.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：天津師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D924.3

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 丁智杰;聚眾斗毆中的正當(dāng)防衛(wèi)問題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年

2 周維;淺析聚眾斗毆罪[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年

3 儲盛楠;情節(jié)加重犯基本問題研究[D];南京大學(xué);2011年

4 黨濤;論聚眾斗毆罪[D];西南政法大學(xué);2010年

5 柯武松;論聚眾斗毆罪[D];武漢大學(xué);2004年

，

本文編號：2262365