本文關(guān)鍵詞：論自救行為　出處：《吉林大學(xué)》2009年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 自救行為 正當(dāng)化根據(jù) 刑法評(píng)價(jià)

【摘要】： 自救行為和正當(dāng)防衛(wèi)與緊急避險(xiǎn)一樣,同屬于違法阻卻性事由,但與此相對(duì)應(yīng)的是在理論研究中,正當(dāng)防衛(wèi)和緊急避險(xiǎn)都有著自己的一席之地,而有關(guān)自救行為的研究卻難覓芳蹤。也正因此使得司法機(jī)關(guān)對(duì)于自救行為的適法性有著較大爭議,直接導(dǎo)致了同類案件卻有著不同的判決,因此有必要對(duì)自救行為進(jìn)行一次全面的分析。本文通過對(duì)比、引證等研究方法對(duì)自救行為進(jìn)行了分析,通過與正當(dāng)防衛(wèi)和緊急避險(xiǎn)的比較得出自救行為的概念定義,又從成立條件方面較詳細(xì)地分析了自救行為的構(gòu)成要件,以期起到與其他違法阻卻性事由相區(qū)分的作用。從引述了兩大法系中的部分國家關(guān)于自救行為的認(rèn)定方式得出自救行為正當(dāng)化的依據(jù)。在論文的最后部分對(duì)自救行為理論的完善以及法律的構(gòu)建提出幾點(diǎn)建議,希望能對(duì)解決自救行為的模糊缺陷微盡綿薄之力。
[Abstract]:The behavior of self-rescue and legitimate defense are the same as the reason of illegal obstruction of sexual affairs, but the corresponding is that in the theoretical research, justifiable defense and emergency risk avoidance have their own place. However, the research on self-rescue behavior is difficult to find a trace, which makes the judicial organs have more controversy about the suitability of self-rescue behavior, which directly leads to the similar cases but has different judgments. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a comprehensive analysis of self-rescue behavior. Through the comparison with justifiable defense and emergency risk avoidance, the concept of self-rescue behavior is defined, and the constitutive elements of self-rescue behavior are analyzed in detail from the aspect of establishing conditions. In order to play a role in differentiating from other illegal obstruction of sexual reasons. From citing the two major legal systems on the identification of self-rescue behavior to obtain the basis for the justification of self-rescue. In the last part of the paper on self-rescue. The perfection of the behavior theory and the construction of the law put forward some suggestions. It is hoped that it can do little to solve the fuzzy defect of self-rescue behavior.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：D914

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 陳興良;正當(dāng)化事由研究[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2000年03期

2 徐昕;通過私力救濟(jì)實(shí)現(xiàn)正義——兼論報(bào)應(yīng)正義[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2003年05期

3 陳興良;入罪與出罪:罪刑法定司法化的雙重考察[J];法學(xué);2002年12期

4 吳茂見;私力討債的法律規(guī)制[J];河北法學(xué);1994年03期

5 李培澤;論自助行為的刑法意義[J];江海學(xué)刊;1996年01期

6 徐建偉;論自助行為[J];理論觀察;2001年01期

7 劉偉;菅從進(jìn);;論自救行為[J];蘭州學(xué)刊;2006年01期

8 房清俠;正當(dāng)防衛(wèi)擴(kuò)張之評(píng)判——兼論自救行為[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年03期

9 游偉,孫萬恒;自救行為及其刑法評(píng)價(jià)[J];政治與法律;1998年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1360383