本文選題：私力救濟(jì)　切入點：自救行為　出處：《湖南大學(xué)》2006年碩士論文

【摘要】： 探尋自救行為的歷史屬性以及現(xiàn)實基礎(chǔ),從歷史到現(xiàn)實的脈絡(luò)中,可以感受自救行為的客觀存在。然而,存在就意味著合理嗎?自救行為作為公民依憑私力實施的權(quán)利救濟(jì),從形式上看,體現(xiàn)了國家追求的秩序與公民崇尚的自由之間的沖突,也充斥著自救行為人與侵害人之間權(quán)利的對抗。盡管如此,國家不能也不可能完全禁止公民選擇自救。因為在公力救濟(jì)不能發(fā)揮作用的時刻,再否定私力救濟(jì),意味著公民的權(quán)利無法保障,顯然違背正義。同時,面對私力救濟(jì)在現(xiàn)實中存在的問題與沖突,通過法律權(quán)衡利益,科學(xué)、合理的設(shè)計自救行為正當(dāng)化的成立條件,將其控制在與法秩序和諧的范圍內(nèi)。如此一來,一方面可以彌補(bǔ)公力救濟(jì)的真空地帶,維護(hù)法治秩序,實現(xiàn)公民權(quán)利保障;另一方面,發(fā)揮法律的指導(dǎo)性功能,使公民明晰自救行為正當(dāng)性的界限,對選擇的行為有合理預(yù)期,以防止權(quán)利的濫用。納入到刑法視野的自救行為,往往表現(xiàn)為一種侵害性,形式上符合某種犯罪構(gòu)成。但從實質(zhì)違法的角度,法益保護(hù)說輔之社會相當(dāng)說可以詮釋其正當(dāng)性根據(jù)。自救行為實施的前提條件是權(quán)利按照法律程序等待國家機(jī)關(guān)的救助,就不可能恢復(fù)或者顯著難以恢復(fù)時。行為人客觀上采取的自救手段須具有必要性和相當(dāng)性。主觀上要有自救意圖。為適應(yīng)現(xiàn)實需要,救濟(jì)之權(quán)利,亦應(yīng)包括他人權(quán)利與公共利益。寫作本文,希望一是可以為自救行為的成立條件的立法選擇和制度安排提供明確的理論支持;二是為司法實務(wù)對于自救行為性質(zhì)的認(rèn)定,提供可操作的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。
[Abstract]:To explore the historical attribute of self-help behavior and realistic foundation, from history to reality in the context of the objective existence can feel the self-help behavior. However, there is a reasonable means? As citizens rely on self-help behavior of private implementation of the right to relief, from the formal point of view, reflects the conflict between countries and citizens advocating the pursuit of the order free, is full of rights between the perpetrator and the victim in the self confrontation. Nevertheless, the state can not be completely banned citizens to choose self-help. Because they can not play the role of time in relief of public power, no private relief means the rights of citizens can not be guaranteed, is clearly contrary to justice. At the same time, in the face of private relief of problems and conflicts in reality, through legal balance interests, science, design conditions justify the self-help behavior reasonable, the control law and order in the range of harmony .濡傛涓，

本文編號：1663711