本文選題：擾亂法庭秩序罪 + 適用現(xiàn)狀�。� 參考：《安徽大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：法院是國(guó)家的審判機(jī)關(guān),是詮釋國(guó)家公平正義的特殊場(chǎng)所。良好的法庭秩序是實(shí)現(xiàn)審判活動(dòng)程序正義的前提,程序正義得到保障,實(shí)體正義才能實(shí)現(xiàn)。隨著訴訟活動(dòng)日益成為人們解決糾紛的主要途徑,擾亂法庭秩序的現(xiàn)象已經(jīng)成為了我國(guó)庭審過程中不可忽視的問題。這不僅嚴(yán)重妨害了我國(guó)司法機(jī)關(guān)的正�；顒�(dòng),也阻礙我國(guó)法治社會(huì)的建設(shè)。為了保護(hù)法庭秩序,1997年《刑法》修訂時(shí),首次設(shè)立的擾亂法庭秩序罪。但是,1997年《刑法》的適用并沒有遏制此現(xiàn)象的發(fā)生,筆者在分析適用現(xiàn)狀時(shí)得出,本罪的發(fā)生沒有地域的限制,行為方式也更加多樣化。立法者為了更好的維護(hù)我國(guó)的法庭秩序,在此次《刑法修正案(九)》中,以原有擾亂法庭秩序罪為基礎(chǔ),擴(kuò)大了本罪的行為對(duì)象,細(xì)化了具體罪狀。但是,刑法學(xué)術(shù)界和律師界對(duì)該罪的適用問題上一直存有爭(zhēng)議,尤其是對(duì)新增加的兩項(xiàng)條款。本文以擾亂法庭秩序罪目前的適用現(xiàn)狀為基礎(chǔ),并結(jié)合相關(guān)的理論成果,深入研究擾亂法庭秩序罪的司法認(rèn)定問題,以指導(dǎo)司法實(shí)踐。為了明確擾亂法庭秩序罪在司法實(shí)踐中的認(rèn)定問題,筆者認(rèn)為,只有先了解本罪近幾年的司法適用現(xiàn)狀,找到本罪的適用問題,才能更有針對(duì)性地理解修訂后的本罪。因此,本文首先對(duì)擾亂法庭秩序罪的適用現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行了分析,整理了北大法寶網(wǎng)和中國(guó)裁判文書網(wǎng)上的相關(guān)案例,并從地域分布、行為方式、犯罪行為、判決年份以及量刑幅度五個(gè)方面分別進(jìn)行了數(shù)據(jù)上的統(tǒng)計(jì)。并從《刑法修正案(九)》頒布前后的角度進(jìn)行了對(duì)比分析。最終總結(jié)得出,《刑法修正案(九)》對(duì)本罪的修改,解決了原先舊法的適用范圍窄小等司法現(xiàn)狀問題,但也發(fā)現(xiàn)新法對(duì)于適用現(xiàn)狀中的一些具體問題的界定仍然存在模糊性,有待進(jìn)一步解決。在了解本罪的司法適用現(xiàn)狀的基礎(chǔ)上,本文從擾亂法庭秩序罪的客觀方面和主觀方面進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)的分析和思考,以期對(duì)適用現(xiàn)狀中所產(chǎn)生的問題進(jìn)行解決。在本罪的主觀方面,司法現(xiàn)狀中的他人先前行為或者法院錯(cuò)判問題引發(fā)的擾亂法庭秩序行為的定罪與否,一直存在問題。筆者主要是結(jié)合司法案例進(jìn)行討論分析。而對(duì)于本罪的客觀方面,《刑法修正案(九)》增加了新的行為方式,在司法適用中必定會(huì)產(chǎn)生分歧。筆者著重闡釋了新增法條中的模糊性詞語,如"侮辱、誹謗、威脅"、"不庭法庭制止"、"嚴(yán)重?cái)_亂法庭秩序"、"情節(jié)嚴(yán)重",并結(jié)合相應(yīng)的適用現(xiàn)狀,在理解學(xué)術(shù)觀點(diǎn)之上,力求明確本罪的客觀方面。在本罪與其他關(guān)聯(lián)罪的界分方面,筆者主要是將擾亂法庭秩序罪與妨害公務(wù)罪、尋釁滋事罪、侮辱罪進(jìn)行比較,分別從所侵犯的客體、客觀方面、行為對(duì)象以及犯罪時(shí)間和地點(diǎn)這幾方面進(jìn)行比較分析,并結(jié)合司法現(xiàn)狀中經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)的一些特殊情形和疑難問題等方面進(jìn)行理論研究。與此同時(shí),對(duì)于擾亂法庭秩序罪的罪數(shù)形態(tài)方面和共犯形態(tài)問題,本文主要分析了當(dāng)擾亂法庭秩序的行為同時(shí)觸犯其他罪名時(shí)的處罰方法,以及某些行為人實(shí)行過限故意致人重傷或死亡的情況。
[Abstract]:The court is the judicial organ of the state and a special place to interpret the justice of the state. The good order of the court is the premise to realize the justice of the procedural justice of the trial, the procedural justice is guaranteed and the substantive justice can be realized. As the litigation activity is becoming the main path for people to solve the dispute, the phenomenon of disturbing the court order has become me. In order to protect the order of the court, in order to protect the order of the court, when the criminal law was revised in 1997, the crime of disturbing the court order was first set up in 1997. However, the application of the 1997 < penal law > does not contain the occurrence of this phenomenon, and the author is divided. In order to maintain our country's court order better, the legislator, in order to better safeguard the order of the court of our country, based on the original crime of disturbing the court order in the criminal law amendment (nine), has expanded the crime and refined the specific crime. The law circles have been disputed on the application of the crime, especially the two newly added terms. This article, based on the current application status of the crime of disturbing the order of the tribunal, and combined with the relevant theoretical results, deeply studies the judicial cognizance of the crime of disturbing the order of the court, in order to guide judicial practice in order to make clear the crime of disturbing the order of the court. In judicial practice, the author thinks that only by understanding the current situation of judicial application in recent years and finding the applicable problem of this crime can we understand the revised crime more pertinent. Therefore, this paper first analyzes the current situation of the crime of disturbing the order of the court, and collates the network of the North French treasure network and the Internet of the Chinese referee documents. Related cases, and from the geographical distribution, behavior, criminal behavior, the year of judgment and the range of sentencing five aspects of the statistics respectively. And from the "criminal law amendment (nine) > before and after the promulgation of the angle of the comparison analysis. Finally concluded that the amendment of the criminal law (nine) > the amendment of the original crime, solved the original application of the old law. It is also found that the definition of some specific problems in the application of the new law still has ambiguity and needs to be further solved. On the basis of understanding the current situation of the judicial application of the crime, this paper makes a detailed analysis and Reflection on the objective aspects and the main views of the crime of disturbing the order of the tribunal. There are problems in the subjective aspect of the present crime, the convictions of disturbing the court order caused by the previous behavior of others in the current judicial situation or the court misjudged problems. The author mainly discusses and analyzes the case of the judicial case. And the criminal amendment ("the criminal law amendment" is the objective aspect of the crime. Nine) > > add new ways of behavior, and there will be differences in judicial application. I emphatically explain the vague words in the new law, such as "insult, libel, threat", "stop the court to stop", "seriously disrupt the order of the court", "the plot is serious", and combine the corresponding application situation to understand the academic point of view and strive to clarify the crime. In the aspects of the crime and other related crimes, the author mainly compares the crime of disturbing the order of the court with the crime of obstruction of public affairs, the crime of provocation and the insult, and compares the aspects of the object, the objective aspect, the object of behavior and the time and place of the crime, which are often seen in the current situation of the judicature. At the same time, there are some special cases and difficult problems. At the same time, in order to disturb the form of the crime of the order of the court and the problem of the form of the accomplice, this article mainly analyzes the punishment method when the act of disturbing the order of the court is at the same time violates the other crimes, and some of the perpetrator is deliberately causing serious injury or death. The situation of death.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D924.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 蔣華林;劉志強(qiáng);;“死磕派律師”是否走向黃昏?——以《刑法修正案(九)》第37條的理解與適用為中心[J];法治研究;2016年02期

2 陳興良;;擾亂法庭秩序罪的修訂:以律師為視角的評(píng)判[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2016年01期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 辛漢洲;妨害司法秩序現(xiàn)象研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué);2016年

2 王雪冰;擾亂法庭秩序罪相關(guān)問題研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué);2016年

3 付麗;我國(guó)刑法中聚眾犯罪處罰差異性研究[D];華僑大學(xué);2014年

4 馬瑩;共同犯罪實(shí)行過限問題研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2013年

5 劉秋雨;論刑法中的法條競(jìng)合[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

6 李鋒;論擾亂法庭秩序罪的現(xiàn)狀及完善[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：1955642