【摘要】：伴隨著網(wǎng)絡(luò)科技的飛速發(fā)展,以微博、QQ為代表的網(wǎng)絡(luò)社交平臺(tái)迅速普及,它們?cè)跒槿藗兩顜?lái)無(wú)限便利的同時(shí),也為相約自殺提供了一個(gè)新的媒介與平臺(tái)。網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺現(xiàn)象牽涉主體眾多、情形復(fù)雜多變,而我國(guó)現(xiàn)有的法律法規(guī)并不足以解決其中牽涉的許多法律問(wèn)題,導(dǎo)致網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺現(xiàn)象愈發(fā)普遍。為了有效規(guī)制相應(yīng)網(wǎng)絡(luò)虛擬空間,盡可能地保護(hù)公民的生命權(quán),本文針對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺的社會(huì)學(xué)成因和牽涉的爭(zhēng)議法律問(wèn)題進(jìn)行了討論,并提出了相關(guān)建議。全文除引言和結(jié)論之外,一共分為四大部分:第一部分是網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺的類型化分析。該部分首先對(duì)自殺、相約自殺和網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺現(xiàn)象進(jìn)行了簡(jiǎn)單的定性,突出強(qiáng)調(diào)了該類不良現(xiàn)象在當(dāng)下的惡劣社會(huì)影響。其次,從近些年發(fā)生的網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺案件中提取出其一般共性,將其分為教唆號(hào)召型和單純相約型兩種情況,為下文分析不同主體的法律責(zé)任問(wèn)題做好鋪墊。第二部分是網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺的社會(huì)學(xué)成因分析。這一部分主要從自殺傾向的形成和網(wǎng)絡(luò)外力的強(qiáng)化兩方面展開(kāi)討論。自殺傾向的形成大多基于多重外在壓力的刺激與個(gè)體心理調(diào)節(jié)失衡的共同作用。而網(wǎng)絡(luò)外力的強(qiáng)化作用主要體現(xiàn)在三個(gè)方面:第一,擴(kuò)散悲觀消極情緒;第二,幫助自殺傾向者克服內(nèi)心恐懼;第三,為具有自殺傾向的群體之間交流普及自殺手段和方式提供了便利。第三部分是對(duì)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺案件涉及的爭(zhēng)議法律問(wèn)題的分析,以求通過(guò)這種分析從法律角度對(duì)該類社會(huì)問(wèn)題作出一種可能的回應(yīng)。這一部分以案例引入,將網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺現(xiàn)象涉及的最重要、同時(shí)也最具爭(zhēng)議的三個(gè)問(wèn)題依據(jù)不同主體加以區(qū)別分析。首先,該部分討論了教唆號(hào)召主體的刑事責(zé)任問(wèn)題,其中引入了筆者對(duì)于教唆自殺行為應(yīng)該受到刑法層面規(guī)制的建議;其次,是對(duì)單純相約自殺情況下中止主體的法律責(zé)任分析,其中主要應(yīng)用了不作為犯罪的理論,以中止自殺行為人是否具有作為義務(wù)、是否具有履行義務(wù)的可能性以及是否履行了相應(yīng)的作為義務(wù)為評(píng)判標(biāo)準(zhǔn)認(rèn)定責(zé)任;最后,討論了網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供主體是否應(yīng)該對(duì)網(wǎng)絡(luò)不良信息承擔(dān)監(jiān)管責(zé)任的問(wèn)題,其中引入了筆者對(duì)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供者應(yīng)該承擔(dān)與其經(jīng)營(yíng)能力相適應(yīng)的必要審查義務(wù)和尊重用戶隱私義務(wù)的倡議。第四部分是筆者提出的網(wǎng)絡(luò)條件下解決該問(wèn)題的相關(guān)建議,建議內(nèi)容從社會(huì)與法律雙重角度入手,包括一般預(yù)防性措施、針對(duì)性預(yù)防措施和法律層面的規(guī)制措施。其中,一般預(yù)防性措施著眼于開(kāi)展網(wǎng)絡(luò)宣傳教育與各類社團(tuán)活動(dòng)、引導(dǎo)網(wǎng)絡(luò)新聞媒體對(duì)自殺類新聞負(fù)責(zé)報(bào)道和增加抗挫折教育;針對(duì)性預(yù)防措施主要是發(fā)展網(wǎng)上心理咨詢、提高正面信息的搜索排名和增加網(wǎng)絡(luò)自殺干預(yù);法律層面規(guī)制措施則是號(hào)召教唆自殺行為入刑、完善互聯(lián)網(wǎng)絡(luò)立法以及加強(qiáng)普法工作。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of network science and technology, social networking platforms, represented by Weibo and QQ, are popularizing rapidly. They not only bring unlimited convenience to people's lives, but also provide a new medium and platform for suicide. The phenomenon of network suicide involves many subjects and the situation is complex and changeable. However, the existing laws and regulations in our country are not enough to solve many legal problems involved in the phenomenon, which leads to the increasing popularity of the phenomenon of network suicide. In order to regulate the corresponding cyberspace effectively and protect the citizen's right to life as much as possible, this paper discusses the sociological causes and the controversial legal issues involved in online suicide, and puts forward some relevant suggestions. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the thesis is divided into four parts: the first part is the type analysis of suicide online dating. In this part, the phenomenon of suicide, suicide by agreement and suicide by internet is characterized, and the bad social influence of this kind of bad phenomenon is emphasized. Secondly, from the network suicide cases in recent years to extract its general commonalities, divided into abettor call type and simple type of two cases, for the following analysis of the legal liability of different subjects to do a good job. The second part is the sociological analysis of network suicide. This part mainly discusses the formation of suicidal tendency and the strengthening of network external force. The formation of suicidal tendency is based on the combination of multiple external stress stimulation and individual psychological adjustment imbalance. The strengthening effect of network external force is mainly reflected in three aspects: first, spreading pessimistic and negative emotions; second, helping suicidal tendency to overcome their inner fear; Thirdly, it facilitates the communication and popularization of suicide means and methods among groups with suicidal propensity. The third part is the analysis of the controversial legal issues involved in the online suicide cases in order to make a possible response to this kind of social problems from the legal point of view. This part introduces the case to analyze the three most important and controversial issues related to the phenomenon of suicide in the network according to different subjects. First of all, this part discusses the criminal responsibility of abettor, including the author's suggestion that the instigation of suicide should be regulated by criminal law. Secondly, it analyzes the legal liability of the suspending subject in the case of simple suicide, in which the theory of omission is mainly applied in order to discontinue the act obligation of the suicide perpetrator. Whether it has the possibility of fulfilling the obligation and whether it has fulfilled the corresponding obligation of act as the criterion of determining the responsibility; Finally, the paper discusses whether the network service provider should take the responsibility for the supervision of the network bad information. This paper introduces the author's suggestion that the network service provider should undertake the necessary review obligation and respect the user's privacy obligation in accordance with its management ability. The fourth part is the author of the network conditions to solve the problem of the relevant recommendations from the social and legal perspectives, including general preventive measures, targeted preventive measures and legal level of regulatory measures. Among them, general preventive measures focus on carrying out network propaganda and education and various kinds of community activities to guide the network news media to report suicide news and increase anti-setback education; Targeted prevention measures are mainly to develop online psychological counseling, improve the search ranking of positive information and increase network suicide intervention; At the legal level, the regulation measures are to call on abettor to commit suicide, to perfect the Internet legislation and to strengthen the popularization of law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D90-052

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李偉;;青少年網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺成因及應(yīng)對(duì)策略[J];青少年犯罪問(wèn)題;2011年03期

2 李明;楊明力;;試論相約自殺[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);1990年02期

3 陳凌雄;從三名臺(tái)灣中學(xué)生相約自殺談起[J];臺(tái)聲;1998年02期

4 吳思遠(yuǎn);;精英女性網(wǎng)上相約自殺：可悲選擇歸錯(cuò)于誰(shuí)?[J];人生與伴侶(上半月版);2008年05期

5 饒國(guó)君;;誰(shuí)為“相約自殺”鬧劇埋單[J];鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)論壇;2008年13期

6 顧明;;相約自殺案適用逮捕與否之研判[J];中國(guó)檢察官;2014年04期

7 常錚;;從“深航空姐赴死”看相約自殺[J];法律與生活;2010年11期

8 王猛;;網(wǎng)友相約自殺 騰訊該當(dāng)何責(zé)?[J];民主與法制;2010年23期

9 王猛;章露;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺騰訊一審被判賠償[J];民主與法制;2011年01期

10 臣子;記錄一起情侶相約自殺案[J];法律與生活;2003年22期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 楊濤;相約自殺法律得管[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2013年

2 楊陽(yáng)邋張雅芳;相約自殺一人身亡反悔方獲刑[N];農(nóng)民日?qǐng)?bào);2008年

3 宋亮亮;遏制“相約自殺”亟待法律發(fā)力[N];�？谕韴�(bào);2012年

4 陸軍;相約自殺，，未走黃泉入了囹圄[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2003年

5 記者 李荔;集體自殺“敲痛”脆弱的心[N];北京科技報(bào);2011年

6 陳軍;相約自殺一方反悔致對(duì)方死亡應(yīng)如何定性[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2005年

7 陳 軍;相約自殺中為自保致對(duì)方死亡如何定性[N];人民法院報(bào);2003年

8 本報(bào)記者 金小林　通訊員 陳一娟;青年自殺之痛[N];麗水日?qǐng)?bào);2010年

9 北京大學(xué)法學(xué)院研究生 張克;網(wǎng)絡(luò)時(shí)代：我們的怕與愛(ài)[N];人民法院報(bào);2010年

10 郭之純;“不鬧不解決”背后的惰政與鈍法[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2010年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條

1 王藝霏;網(wǎng)絡(luò)相約自殺現(xiàn)象的法社會(huì)學(xué)分析[D];山東大學(xué);2017年

2 馬漢博;自殺關(guān)聯(lián)行為的刑法評(píng)價(jià)[D];遼寧大學(xué);2012年

3 吳卓;QQ相約自殺案評(píng)析[D];湖南大學(xué);2014年

4 李雪松;論自殺參與行為[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2008年

5 王s

本文編號(hào)：2350668