本文選題：事后不可罰行為 + 罪數(shù)形態(tài)　； 參考：《河北大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：事后不可罰行為是罪數(shù)形態(tài)理論的研究范疇,對(duì)罪數(shù)形態(tài)理論的充分把握是正確研究事后不可罰行為的基礎(chǔ)。德日及我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)對(duì)罪數(shù)形態(tài)的研究視角各有不同,德國(guó)刑法界以“競(jìng)合論”的視角處理司法實(shí)踐中的罪數(shù)問題;日本與臺(tái)灣地區(qū)刑法理論雖然都是以“罪數(shù)論”的角度解釋實(shí)踐中的罪數(shù)問題,但在具體罪數(shù)形態(tài)的區(qū)分上又各不相同。德國(guó)刑法理論界將事后不可罰行為定位于“法條競(jìng)合”下的吸收關(guān)系之中;日本刑法界則將其歸類于“包括的一罪”某一具體類型;臺(tái)灣地區(qū)刑法學(xué)者則更傾向于以“吸收犯”的視角對(duì)事后不可罰行為進(jìn)行解釋。然而,各國(guó)罪數(shù)形態(tài)理論的研究都有著濃郁的地方特色與傳統(tǒng)背景。事后不可罰行為理論的引入可能會(huì)造成理論認(rèn)識(shí)上的混亂甚至與既有理論的沖突、不協(xié)調(diào)等一系列問題。但同時(shí)事后不可罰行為理論的輸入,有利于豐富與完善我國(guó)罪數(shù)形態(tài)理論以及合理解釋司法實(shí)踐中遇到的難題。事后不可罰行為是指行為人在本罪完成之后,出于確保、利用或處分本罪之結(jié)果等目的而又實(shí)施的符合構(gòu)成要件的行為,基于行為人主觀上某一總的犯罪意圖與前后行為之間的緊密關(guān)聯(lián)性而對(duì)后行為不再單獨(dú)處罰的犯罪形態(tài)。事后行為未侵犯新的法益或未擴(kuò)大對(duì)原法益的侵害范圍并非事后行為不予處罰的必要條件。因此,事后不可罰行為的成立并不以本罪為狀態(tài)犯為前提,亦不以未侵犯新的法益為限制。在我國(guó),從傳統(tǒng)刑法理論對(duì)罪數(shù)形態(tài)的分類以及實(shí)踐中事后不可罰行為的成立場(chǎng)合來看,將事后不可罰行為定位于牽連犯下的一個(gè)具體形態(tài)更為適宜,并以此為基礎(chǔ)對(duì)事后不可罰行為的特征與不罰根據(jù)予以重新梳理。實(shí)踐中,事后不可罰行為與狀態(tài)犯、即成犯、共同犯罪形態(tài)及訴訟時(shí)效交織糾纏在一起而產(chǎn)生一系列理論上的難題。行為人完成盜竊之后又實(shí)施的其他確保不法利益實(shí)現(xiàn)的行為并非全部屬于事后不可罰行為;行為人殺人之后為毀滅證據(jù)、逃避偵查而實(shí)施的掩埋、焚毀尸體等行為構(gòu)成事后不可罰行為�？偠灾�,司法實(shí)踐中對(duì)事后不可罰行為的認(rèn)定應(yīng)該在堅(jiān)持認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合其他理論,綜合考慮刑法基本原則與刑事政策等相關(guān)因素,得出妥當(dāng)結(jié)論。
[Abstract]:The theory of crime number form is based on the understanding of the theory of crime number form.Germany, Japan and Taiwan have different perspectives on the study of the number of crimes. The German criminal law circle deals with the number of crimes in judicial practice from the perspective of "competing theory".Although the theory of criminal law in Japan and Taiwan explains the number of crimes in practice from the angle of "number of crimes", they differ from each other in the differentiation of specific forms of the number of crimes.The theoretical circle of German criminal law defines the afterwards unpunished act as the absorbing relation under the "concurrence of laws", while the Japanese criminal law circles classify it as a specific type of "included crime".Criminal scholars in Taiwan are more inclined to explain the impunity after the event from the angle of "absorbing crime".However, the study of the theory of crime number form has strong local characteristics and traditional background.The introduction of the theory of unpunished behavior after the event may lead to confusion in theoretical understanding and even conflict and disharmony with existing theories.But at the same time, the input of the theory of unpunished behavior after the event is helpful to enrich and perfect the theory of the number of crimes in our country and to explain the problems encountered in the judicial practice reasonably.An act of impunity after the event is an act that the perpetrator, after the completion of the crime, has carried out for the purpose of ensuring, utilizing or punishing the result of the crime, in accordance with the constitutive requirements,Based on the close relationship between a total criminal intention and the behavior before and after the perpetrator subjectively, the form of the crime that no longer punishes the later behavior separately.It is not necessary for ex post action not to violate new legal interests or to extend the scope of infringement of original legal interests.Therefore, the establishment of the act of impunity does not take this crime as the premise of the state crime, nor does it restrict the violation of the new legal interests.In our country, from the classification of the crime number form in the traditional criminal law theory and the establishment situation of the afterwards impunity behavior in practice, it is more appropriate to position the afterwards impunity act as a specific form of implicated crime.And on the basis of this, the characteristics and the basis of impunity are rearranged.In practice, there are a series of theoretical problems arising from the intertwining of the form of joint crime and the limitation of action after the act of punishment and the state crime, that is to say, the adult crime.All other acts committed by the perpetrator after the completion of the theft to ensure the realization of the illegal interests are not all acts that are not punishable after the event; the perpetrator, after killing the person, destroys the evidence and escapes the burial carried out by the investigation,Acts such as incineration of corpses constitute an act of impunity after the event.In a word, in judicial practice, we should insist on the criterion of recognition, combine with other theories, consider the basic principles of criminal law and relevant factors such as criminal policy, and draw an appropriate conclusion.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D924.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 徐太禮,王英軍;不適用數(shù)罪并罰的特殊罪數(shù)形態(tài)簡(jiǎn)析[J];山東公安�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2000年04期

2 劉士心;罪數(shù)形態(tài)競(jìng)合研究[J];河南公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2004年05期

3 劉憲權(quán);;罪數(shù)形態(tài)理論正本清源[J];法學(xué)研究;2009年04期

4 徐立;朱正余;;徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件罪罪數(shù)形態(tài)新論[J];企業(yè)導(dǎo)報(bào);2011年12期

5 戴彩霞;;淺談罪數(shù)形態(tài)[J];知識(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì);2013年03期

6 徐立;徇私舞弊不移交刑事案件罪罪數(shù)形態(tài)的認(rèn)定[J];理論月刊;2005年04期

7 劉德利;;論我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)刑法罪數(shù)形態(tài)的立法和理論對(duì)大陸刑法的借鑒意義[J];甘肅警察職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年01期

8 劉玉民;;瀆職罪的相關(guān)共犯及罪數(shù)形態(tài)問題[J];消費(fèi)導(dǎo)刊;2008年12期

9 王志祥;姚兵;;罪數(shù)形態(tài)研究述評(píng)[J];河北法學(xué);2008年11期

10 馬克昌;中國(guó)內(nèi)地刑法與澳門刑法中罪數(shù)形態(tài)比較研究[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));1999年06期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前2條

1 中國(guó)刑事警察學(xué)院禁毒學(xué)專業(yè)教師 張洪成;盜竊毒品等行為后實(shí)施毒品犯罪的認(rèn)定[N];人民公安報(bào);2009年

2 王禮仁;罪數(shù)理論中的一個(gè)新問題[N];人民法院報(bào);2003年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 李鳳省;危害食品安全犯罪的罪數(shù)形態(tài)研究[D];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué);2015年

2 袁林林;“碰瓷”行為刑法適用研究[D];廣東財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2016年

3 莫芮;徇私舞弊型瀆職罪與受賄罪競(jìng)合罪數(shù)形態(tài)問題研究[D];湘潭大學(xué);2016年

4 李向宇;連續(xù)犯研究[D];河南大學(xué);2016年

5 呂利昆;事后不可罰行為理論的中國(guó)化研究[D];河北大學(xué);2017年

6 王軍;經(jīng)濟(jì)犯罪罪數(shù)形態(tài)研究[D];遼寧大學(xué);2007年

7 閆奕銘;我國(guó)結(jié)合犯的適用研究[D];云南大學(xué);2015年

8 何秀琴;吸收犯存在范圍研究[D];河南大學(xué);2007年

9 李愛華;編造、故意傳播虛假恐怖信息罪的相關(guān)案例分析[D];蘭州大學(xué);2011年

10 郝冠揆;論結(jié)合犯[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：1755173