本文關鍵詞： 刑事被害人諒解 刑罰根據 量刑情節(jié)　出處：《山東大學》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：最高人民法院的相關規(guī)定一再以非正式法源的形式肯定刑事被害人諒解對量刑的影響,新《刑事訴訟法》中將被害人諒解作為可以影響當事人和解的公訴案件的因素,這意味著“諒解”作為量刑情節(jié)有了正式法源的肯定。司法實踐中也早已將“諒解”作為量刑情節(jié)予以適用,諒解作為量刑情節(jié)的案件性質已經不局限于故意傷害、交通肇事這種比較輕微的刑事犯罪,而是擴展到強奸、故意殺人、以危險方法危害公共安全這些社會危害性大的嚴重犯罪案件,雖然個別案件中出現了因受害方提出高價賠償為條件,雙方沒能夠形成諒解反而加深矛盾的情況,但我們不能無視諒解作為量刑情節(jié)已經處于越來越廣泛的地位。理論界對諒解作為量刑情節(jié),由于學者以不同的刑罰根據理論,因此出現了兩種不同的聲音。如以恢復性司法模式和理念為支撐,通常認為刑事被害人諒解作為量刑情節(jié)符合恢復性司法的理念；如以傳統(tǒng)刑罰根據理念為支撐,則認為刑事被害人諒解不應作為量刑情節(jié)。 實踐當中的困惑和理論界的爭議的根本在于,刑事被害人諒解何以能夠影響量刑、諒解如何影響量刑以及諒解影響刑罰如何實現量刑均衡等一系列問題依然存在,沒有得到解決。諒解作為量刑情節(jié)適用,要依據諒解作為量刑情節(jié)的根據和聯(lián)結點、諒解作為量刑情節(jié)的依存條件以及諒解作為量刑情節(jié)度的把握,做到在個案中具體分析,不諒解不能在基準刑之上增加刑罰,以體現刑罰公正。
[Abstract]:The relevant provisions of the Supreme people's Court have repeatedly affirmed, in the form of informal legal sources, the impact of the understanding of criminal victims on sentencing. The new "Criminal procedure Law" regards victim understanding as a factor in public prosecution cases that can affect the reconciliation of the parties. This means that the "understanding" as the circumstances of sentencing has been confirmed as a formal source of law. In judicial practice, the "understanding" has already been applied as the circumstances of sentencing, and the nature of the case of "understanding" as the circumstances of sentencing has not been limited to intentional injury. Traffic accidents are relatively minor criminal offences, but they extend to serious social crimes such as rape, intentional homicide, and endangering public safety by dangerous means. Although in individual cases there has been a situation in which the injured party offered high compensation as a condition, the two sides did not reach an understanding and instead deepened the conflict. But we can't ignore the understanding as the circumstances of sentencing has been in a more and more extensive position. The theory of understanding as the circumstances of sentencing, because scholars use different penalties based on the theory, Therefore, there are two different voices. For example, supported by restorative justice models and concepts, it is generally considered that the understanding of criminal victims as the circumstances of sentencing conforms to the concept of restorative justice; for example, the traditional penalty based on the concept of support, It is considered that the understanding of criminal victim should not be taken as the circumstances of sentencing. The root of the confusion in practice and the controversy in the theoretical circle is that there are still a series of problems, such as how the understanding of criminal victims can influence sentencing, how understanding affects sentencing and how to achieve the balance of sentencing, etc. As the circumstances of sentencing, the understanding should be the basis and joint of the circumstances of sentencing, the understanding as the dependent condition of sentencing circumstances and the understanding as the grasp of the degree of sentencing circumstances, so as to make a specific analysis in the case. No understanding can be added to the standard penalty to reflect the justice of the penalty.
【學位授予單位】：山東大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.13;D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 邱興隆;;死刑的效益之維[J];法學家;2003年02期

2 張麗;史輝;;刑事和解語境下對間接一般預防的思考[J];法制與社會;2012年06期

3 邱興隆;個別預防論的四大立論[J];甘肅政法學院學報;2000年02期

4 王瑞君;;刑事被害人諒解不應成為酌定量刑情節(jié)[J];法學;2012年07期

5 韓友誼;積極的一般預防[J];河北法學;2005年02期

6 張明楷;;責任主義與量刑原理——以點的理論為中心[J];法學研究;2010年05期

7 賈健;;有期徒刑分等的機能與依據——以刑事立法與行刑的不同范式為視角[J];南昌大學學報(人文社會科學版);2012年01期

8 邱興隆;一般預防論的價值分析[J];法學論壇;2000年04期

9 邱興隆;個別預防論的源流[J];法學論壇;2001年01期

10 張小虎;報應主義與目的主義之對峙及調和[J];社會科學;2003年02期

，

本文編號：1517335