【摘要】：現(xiàn)代客觀歸責(zé)理論是德國(guó)刑法理論中犯罪論體系精致化的產(chǎn)物，近年來在我國(guó)刑法學(xué)界引起了廣泛熱烈的討論，其中也不乏負(fù)面批評(píng)和質(zhì)疑，主要集中于客觀歸責(zé)功能的過度擴(kuò)張問題�？陀^歸責(zé)理論緣起于對(duì)“條件說因果關(guān)系無限回溯”難題的解決，但由于其所提供的歸責(zé)原則向?qū)嵭行袨轭I(lǐng)域、主觀罪過領(lǐng)域和違法性等領(lǐng)域的擴(kuò)張適用，造成了人們對(duì)客觀歸責(zé)理論功能定位本體性認(rèn)知上的混亂。然而客觀歸責(zé)理論功能定位并不像批評(píng)者所認(rèn)為的那么模糊不清，很大程度上是因?yàn)樗麄儧]有在階層理論中把握客觀歸責(zé)理論，由此造成了誤解。當(dāng)然也不可否認(rèn)客觀歸責(zé)理論本身存在判斷體系不合理、細(xì)部規(guī)則龐雜等缺陷。 妥當(dāng)理解客觀歸責(zé)理論的功能定位，應(yīng)當(dāng)尋求更深層次的理論支持。故本文考察了客觀歸責(zé)理論的學(xué)說史以及形成當(dāng)今理論格局的現(xiàn)代知識(shí)背景，以期能為客觀歸責(zé)理論功能定位提供有力理論支撐�？陀^歸責(zé)理論功能定位的學(xué)術(shù)爭(zhēng)議說明了“目的指向”的認(rèn)知方式并不能為客觀歸責(zé)理論尋求合理功能定位，故本文轉(zhuǎn)以“方法指向”為研究方向，在與相當(dāng)理論的關(guān)系梳理中得出了客觀歸責(zé)理論合理的功能定位。 客觀歸責(zé)理論合理的功能定位是“實(shí)質(zhì)構(gòu)成要件理論”，是關(guān)于行為人——行為——結(jié)果之間在刑法意義上的客觀聯(lián)系，且在論證構(gòu)成要件成立的同時(shí)肯定地、積極地推斷了違法性的成立。因此客觀歸責(zé)是溝通構(gòu)成要件符合性與違法性之間的橋梁，是在事實(shí)關(guān)系上論證客觀不法的理論體系，并且為有責(zé)性的判斷提供客觀的根據(jù)。 解決了客觀歸責(zé)理論的功能定位問題并不意味著其本身存在的缺陷得以消除，反而需要對(duì)客觀歸責(zé)體系作進(jìn)一步修復(fù)。客觀歸責(zé)理論作為客觀不法的論證體系，不是也不應(yīng)是規(guī)則的簡(jiǎn)單堆砌。為了更好實(shí)現(xiàn)客觀歸責(zé)理論的功能，針對(duì)洛克信的客觀歸責(zé)理論體系的缺陷，需要重新整合歸責(zé)路徑，并重新構(gòu)建這一理論體系�？陀^歸責(zé)理論重視歸責(zé)要素之間的互相關(guān)聯(lián)性，這種關(guān)聯(lián)性貫穿于各個(gè)判斷階段，，因而客觀歸責(zé)的判斷體系是一個(gè)動(dòng)態(tài)的過程。通過將客觀歸責(zé)劃分為四個(gè)層次，顯示出客觀歸責(zé)體系所具有的逐步限縮的功能，揭示出客觀歸責(zé)的體系化實(shí)際上整合了意志歸責(zé)和規(guī)范歸責(zé)兩個(gè)路徑�？陀^歸責(zé)不是簡(jiǎn)單的規(guī)則集合體，經(jīng)由四階段的判斷，完成了經(jīng)驗(yàn)評(píng)價(jià)到道義評(píng)價(jià)再到規(guī)范評(píng)價(jià)的判斷過程。
[Abstract]:The modern objective imputation theory is the result of the refinement of the criminal theory system in German criminal law theory. In recent years, it has aroused extensive and heated discussion in the criminal law circle of our country, among which there is no lack of negative criticism and doubt. It mainly focuses on the excessive expansion of objective imputation function. The theory of objective imputation originates from the solution of the problem of "unlimited backtracking of causality", but the principle of imputation is applied to the fields of practice behavior, subjective fault and illegality, etc. It has caused confusion on the function of objective imputation theory. However, the functional orientation of objective imputation theory is not as vague as critics think, largely because they have not grasped objective imputation theory in stratum theory, which has resulted in misunderstanding. Of course, it can not be denied that objective imputation theory itself has some defects, such as unreasonable judgment system and numerous detailed rules. To properly understand the functional orientation of objective imputation theory, we should seek deeper theoretical support. Therefore, this paper examines the theoretical history of objective imputation theory and the modern knowledge background of forming the present theoretical pattern, in order to provide a powerful theoretical support for the functional orientation of objective imputation theory. The academic controversy about the functional orientation of objective imputation theory shows that the cognitive mode of "aim direction" can not seek reasonable functional orientation for objective liability theory, so this paper turns to "method direction" as the research direction. The reasonable functional orientation of objective imputation theory is obtained in the analysis of the relation with equivalent theory. The reasonable functional orientation of objective liability theory is "the theory of essential constitutive elements", which is about the objective relation between the doer and the behavior and the result in the criminal law sense, and proves that the constitutive elements are established at the same time. The establishment of illegality was positively inferred. Therefore, objective imputation is a bridge between conformance and illegality of constitutive elements, a theoretical system to prove objective wrongfulness in factual relation, and provides an objective basis for judgment of responsibility. Solving the problem of functional orientation of objective imputation theory does not mean that its own defects can be eliminated, on the contrary, the objective imputation system needs to be further repaired. Objective imputation theory, as an objective and illegal system of argumentation, is not and should not be a simple pile of rules. In order to better realize the function of objective imputation theory, aiming at the defects of Lockerson's objective imputation theory system, it is necessary to reintegrate the imputation path and re-construct this theoretical system. The theory of objective imputation attaches importance to the interrelation between the elements of imputation, which runs through every judgment stage, so the judgment system of objective imputation is a dynamic process. By dividing the objective imputation into four levels, it shows that the objective imputation system has the function of gradually limiting and shrinking, and reveals that the systematization of objective imputation actually integrates the two paths of volitional imputation and normative imputation. Objective imputation is not a simple set of rules. Through four stages of judgment, the judgment process of experience evaluation, moral evaluation and norm evaluation is completed.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華僑大學(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 林東茂;;客觀歸責(zé)理論[J];北方法學(xué);2009年05期

2 孫運(yùn)梁;;客觀歸責(zé)在犯罪構(gòu)成體系中的定位及其功能[J];重慶理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué));2012年03期

3 王志遠(yuǎn);;實(shí)質(zhì)違法觀的續(xù)造:客觀歸責(zé)理論的真正貢獻(xiàn)[J];吉林大學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

4 陳興良;;從歸因到歸責(zé):客觀歸責(zé)理論研究[J];法學(xué)研究;2006年02期

5 陳曉明;;風(fēng)險(xiǎn)社會(huì)之刑法應(yīng)對(duì)[J];法學(xué)研究;2009年06期

6 劉艷紅;;客觀歸責(zé)理論:質(zhì)疑與反思[J];中外法學(xué);2011年06期

7 倪培興;;解讀客觀歸責(zé)理論[J];中國(guó)刑事法雜志;2007年01期

8 楊彩霞;刑法因果關(guān)系論之危機(jī)、反思與出路[J];國(guó)家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年04期

9 孫運(yùn)梁;;客觀歸責(zé)理論的引入與因果關(guān)系的功能回歸[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2013年01期

10 張明楷;;也談客觀歸責(zé)理論 兼與周光權(quán)、劉艷紅教授商榷[J];中外法學(xué);2013年02期

本文編號(hào)：2386159