本文選題：禁止重復(fù)評(píng)價(jià)原則　切入點(diǎn)：全面評(píng)價(jià)原則　出處：《比較法研究》2017年06期

【摘要】：犯罪競合處于定罪與量刑的交叉與沖突點(diǎn)上。德國犯罪競合理論一方面嚴(yán)格遵循行為數(shù)即罪數(shù)的定罪規(guī)則,另一方面又必須貫徹禁止重復(fù)評(píng)價(jià)與全面評(píng)價(jià)的量刑原則。不真正法條競合名為法條競合,卻行想象競合之實(shí),是罪數(shù)規(guī)則與量刑原則沖突妥協(xié)的產(chǎn)物。這導(dǎo)致了德國法條競合理論內(nèi)部的體系混亂,以及其與想象競合之間界限的模糊。在繼受德國犯罪競合理論的過程中,在解決我國刑法所面臨的特定競合問題時(shí),應(yīng)當(dāng)回歸競合的基本原則。只有從禁止重復(fù)評(píng)價(jià)與全面評(píng)價(jià)的量刑原則出發(fā),才能正確理解法條競合與想象競合區(qū)分的必要性,才能正確處理罪量相關(guān)的中國式競合問題。若兩罪規(guī)定了不同性質(zhì)與類型的定量要素,即便在定性要素上存在一般與特殊的關(guān)系,也應(yīng)按照想象競合的規(guī)則從一重處斷。
[Abstract]:Crime concurrence lies in the intersection and conflict of conviction and sentencing.On the one hand, German criminal concurrence theory strictly follows the conviction rule of the number of acts, on the other hand, it must carry out the sentencing principle of prohibiting repeated evaluation and comprehensive evaluation.It is the result of the conflict between the number of crimes and the principle of sentencing.This leads to the confusion of the system within the German law theory and the blurring of the boundary between it and imagination.In the course of following the theory of criminal concurrence in Germany, we should return to the basic principle of concurrence when solving the problem of special concurrence in criminal law of our country.Only from the sentencing principle of prohibiting repeated evaluation and comprehensive evaluation, can we correctly understand the necessity of distinguishing between competing and imaginative concurrence of laws and articles, and correctly handle the problem of Chinese-style concurrence related to the amount of crime.If the two crimes stipulate the quantitative elements of different properties and types, even if there is a general and special relationship in the qualitative elements, they should be broken from the same place according to the rule of imaginative concurrence.
【作者單位】： 南京大學(xué)法學(xué)院;南京大學(xué)中德法學(xué)研究所;
【分類號(hào)】：D951.6;DD914

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 丁慧敏;;德國競合論下的法條競合[J];刑事法評(píng)論;2013年02期

2 趙煒;;從一起驗(yàn)花標(biāo)識(shí)被盜案說起——析盜竊、詐騙、妨害公文證件印章違紀(jì)與想象競合之處理[J];先鋒隊(duì);2013年06期

3 苗妙;;關(guān)于脅迫趕走公路收費(fèi)人員并假扮其身份收取路費(fèi)案件的定性及分析[J];法制博覽(中旬刊);2013年07期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前4條

1 許毓忠;法條競合莫“一刀切”[N];醫(yī)藥經(jīng)濟(jì)報(bào);2013年

2 中國海監(jiān)第一支隊(duì) 孫璐;淺析法條競合在執(zhí)法中的適用[N];中國海洋報(bào);2013年

3 山東省單縣工商局 宋健;本案是法條競合還是想象競合[N];中國工商報(bào);2009年

4 ;適用法律兩處不當(dāng)[N];中國醫(yī)藥報(bào);2003年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 殷馳;論法條競合及其適用原則[D];四川大學(xué);2002年

，

本文編號(hào)：1718349