本文選題：單位犯罪 + 單位刑事責(zé)任��； 參考：《華東政法學(xué)院》2004年碩士論文

【摘要】：修改后的我國刑法將單位犯罪和自然人犯罪一樣列入到刑法典之中,但是由于理論上對單位犯罪仍存在較多爭議,立法上采取了回避矛盾的方式,將單位犯罪虛化成空洞的概念,造成理論和司法實踐的嚴(yán)重脫節(jié)。近年來,隨著我國經(jīng)濟建設(shè)的不斷發(fā)展,單位日益成為我國經(jīng)濟、社會生活中的最活躍的主體,隨之而來的單位危害社會的行為也層出不窮,但由于我國單位犯罪的規(guī)定存在嚴(yán)重缺陷,使一些嚴(yán)重危害社會的單位行為得不到有效懲處,削弱了刑法應(yīng)有的威懾力。 目前,無論是理論界,還是司法界的通說都將“經(jīng)單位集體討論或單位負(fù)責(zé)人決定實施的危害社會的行為”作為單位犯罪的核心要件。但是,這種理解不符合現(xiàn)實社會中的單位犯罪的實際情況,難以劃清單位代表或機關(guān)成員的犯罪和單位自身犯罪之間的界限。單位作為人格化的社會系統(tǒng)具有其自身的意志,在追究單位犯罪的刑事責(zé)任時,應(yīng)從追究單位自身固有的責(zé)任角度出發(fā),除關(guān)注單位集體決定和單位負(fù)責(zé)人的決定之外,還應(yīng)考慮單位的目標(biāo)、業(yè)務(wù)范圍、規(guī)章制度、防范措施等單位自身制度方面的情況。 單位犯罪的主觀罪過是認(rèn)定單位犯罪關(guān)鍵,我國傳統(tǒng)的單位犯罪理論和司法實踐完全根據(jù)單位中的自然人罪過來認(rèn)定單位的罪過。事實上,單位罪過具有與自然人罪過不同的特征,在考察單位整體意志時,要注意從單位自身的特征出發(fā),將個人意志排除出去。單位故意犯罪是單位罪過的主要形式,但單位過失犯罪也是單位犯罪中的重要方面。 我國刑法規(guī)定了130多種單位犯罪,但對單位犯罪范圍的規(guī)定并沒有明確的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),并將單位盜竊等完全符合犯罪基本特征的嚴(yán)重危害社會行為排除在外, 單位犯 WP=4 罪的范圍不僅取決于所采用的單位刑事責(zé)任原理和人們的“習(xí)慣”,同樣也要隨著社會的發(fā)展、觀念的更新而及時進行修正。 國家機關(guān)作為犯罪主體在理論和實踐中都有較大爭議,從我國現(xiàn)實狀況出發(fā),應(yīng)當(dāng)規(guī)定機關(guān)犯罪,并且應(yīng)當(dāng)根據(jù)機關(guān)的性質(zhì)進一步完善機關(guān)犯罪的規(guī)定,增設(shè)單位瀆職犯罪,這不僅是對現(xiàn)實當(dāng)中機關(guān)犯罪的應(yīng)對,也是維護國家法制、促進依法行政的必要手段。 最后,由于我國單位犯罪的刑罰手段單一,處罰過輕而沒有發(fā)揮威懾作用,應(yīng)當(dāng)建立符合單位犯罪實際情況的獨立的單位犯罪刑罰體系。 本文借鑒了國外單位犯罪立法和理論,對我國單位犯罪的理論根據(jù)、單位犯罪的主觀罪過以及單位犯罪的范圍等問題進行積極的探索,嘗試提出一些切合實際的觀點和看法,以期對完善我國單位犯罪的立法起一些推動作用。
[Abstract]:The revised Chinese criminal law includes unit crime as well as natural person crime in the criminal code. However, because there are still many disputes on unit crime in theory, the legislation adopts the way of avoiding contradiction. The empty concept of unit crime leads to a serious disconnection between theory and judicial practice. In recent years, with the continuous development of economic construction in our country, the unit has increasingly become the most active subject in our country's economy and social life. However, due to the serious defects in the regulation of unit crime in our country, some unit acts which seriously harm the society can not be punished effectively, which weakens the deterrent force due to the criminal law. At present, both the theoretical and judicial circles regard "the behaviors that are harmful to the society which are decided by the collective discussion of the unit or the person in charge of the unit" as the core elements of the unit crime. However, this kind of understanding does not accord with the actual situation of unit crime in real society, and it is difficult to draw a clear line between the crime of unit representative or the member of organization and the crime of unit itself. As a humanized social system, the unit has its own will. When investigating the criminal responsibility of the unit crime, it should proceed from the angle of the inherent responsibility of the unit itself, except for the collective decision of the unit and the decision of the person in charge of the unit. Consideration should also be given to the objectives, scope of business, rules and regulations, preventive measures and other aspects of the unit's own system. The subjective crime of unit crime is the key to the identification of unit crime. The traditional theory and judicial practice of unit crime are based on the crime of natural person in the unit. In fact, unit crime has different characteristics from natural person's sin. When examining the whole volition of the unit, we should pay attention to the characteristics of the unit itself and exclude the individual will. Unit intentional crime is the main form of unit crime, but unit negligent crime is also an important aspect of unit crime. The criminal law of our country has stipulated more than 130 kinds of unit crime, but there is no clear standard for the scope of unit crime, and the serious harmful social behavior, such as unit theft, which accords with the basic characteristics of the crime, is excluded. WP=4 The scope of crime not only depends on the principle of unit criminal responsibility and people's "custom", but also should be amended with the development of society and the renewal of concept. As the subject of the crime, the state organs are in great dispute in theory and practice. Proceeding from the reality of our country, they should stipulate that the organs commit crimes, and should further perfect the regulations of the organ crimes according to the nature of the organs, and establish the crime of dereliction of duty by the units. This is not only the response to the actual organ crime, but also the necessary means to maintain the national legal system and promote the administration by law. Finally, because the punishment method of unit crime in our country is single, the punishment is too light and does not play a deterrent role, we should establish an independent unit crime penalty system that accords with the actual situation of unit crime. This paper draws lessons from the legislation and theory of unit crime in foreign countries, explores the theoretical basis of unit crime in our country, the subjective sin of unit crime and the scope of unit crime, and tries to put forward some practical viewpoints and views. In order to improve the legislation of unit crime in China to play a role in some promotion.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法學(xué)院
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2004
【分類號】：D924.1

【引證文獻】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 葛美娟;單位犯罪刑罰適用中的重要問題探討[D];西南政法大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：1832881