發(fā)布時間：2018-06-18 02:30

  本文選題：扒竊行為 + 立法沿革　； 參考：《河南大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：《刑法修正案（八）》對于盜竊罪的修改，使得扒竊行為從行政處罰層面上升到刑法犯罪層面，這一變化引起了社會上的廣泛的討論。這一修改使扒竊行為較為清晰的進(jìn)入社會公眾視野，同時也提升了打擊扒竊犯罪的力度，扒竊行為因為較大的社會危害性和嚴(yán)重的主觀惡性被納入刑法犯罪范疇之內(nèi)，與我國一貫主張的寬嚴(yán)相濟(jì)的刑事政策的要求相吻合。對扒竊行為自身進(jìn)行一次比較透徹的剖析有利于司法實踐中的具體應(yīng)用，對其自身相對模糊的、不明確的特性深入研究，是對立法的明晰。這一修改本身就證明了我國立法的與時俱進(jìn)。 本文筆者通過對扒竊的立法沿革的梳理，深入分析了刑法對扒竊行為的懲處依據(jù)，充分肯定了扒竊行為入刑的合情合理性，雖然將扒竊行為納入刑法處罰范疇之內(nèi)，并予以法律上的規(guī)定，但是在當(dāng)前社會中仍然存在著關(guān)于適用扒竊行為的法律上的困境，通過引用例子進(jìn)行評析，對扒竊的概念進(jìn)行明確研究界定，從而對扒竊概念和自身特征的解析，認(rèn)為扒竊的含義是：以非法占有為目的在公共場所或者其他開放性公共場所秘密竊取他人隨身攜帶的財物的行為。同時，對扒竊行為的犯罪構(gòu)成進(jìn)行了分析研究，從犯罪構(gòu)成的四個方面進(jìn)行了細(xì)致的剖析，將其作為一個獨立的罪看待，有利于厘清扒竊行為在司法適用中的繁瑣模糊的不同一之處。由于其自身的特殊性和復(fù)雜性，筆者從橫向?qū)Π歉`行為中幾個模糊的詞語進(jìn)行了明確的界定，諸如“公共場所”“隨身攜帶”等。扒竊行為作為盜竊罪中新增的罪狀之一，有必要與其他相關(guān)的幾種罪狀進(jìn)行區(qū)分，以期充分的對扒竊作出更明確清晰的范圍。針對于此方面的實踐運用問題，筆者提出了相關(guān)的建議，認(rèn)為對于扒竊行為的認(rèn)定，應(yīng)綜合具體的案件事實、情節(jié)和數(shù)額、次數(shù)等多方面的因素，同時充分運用刑法總則中“但書”來判斷某一扒竊行為是否屬于犯罪范疇。通過一系列的比較分析，從《刑修八》和兩高的司法解釋中對扒竊行為的刑事責(zé)任進(jìn)行了解讀，使得刑法中對扒竊行為的認(rèn)定處罰在司法實踐中得到更加合情合理的運用和執(zhí)行。 本文除引言和結(jié)語外，可以分為四個部分： 第一部分：刑法中的扒竊行為概述。首先，該部分深入分析研究刑法關(guān)于對扒竊行為懲處的歷史沿革，從1979年以來的立法司法的規(guī)定解釋梳理我國刑法對于扒竊行為的懲處程度，日益重視以及詳細(xì)的規(guī)定使得扒竊行為進(jìn)入公眾的視野；其次，該部分分析了扒竊行為入罪的立法依據(jù)，充分論證了入罪的合理性和實時性；最后，對于扒竊行為的刑法懲處在司法實踐中的適用結(jié)合《刑修八》進(jìn)行分析，針對扒竊行為入刑的實質(zhì)爭議以及入刑后在司法實踐中所面臨的困境應(yīng)當(dāng)如何解決等提出一系列的問題。 第二部分：刑法中的扒竊行為的內(nèi)涵及其犯罪構(gòu)成。首先，該部分深入分析了扒竊行為的實質(zhì)和內(nèi)涵，在綜合研究了各學(xué)說理論的基礎(chǔ)之上，提出了本文對于扒竊行為的概念和實質(zhì)內(nèi)涵的見解；其次，該部分對扒竊行為作為盜竊罪的法定罪狀之一進(jìn)行的對其內(nèi)在的特質(zhì)符合刑法上規(guī)定的犯罪構(gòu)成各方面的分析解讀，為扒竊入刑提供了強(qiáng)有力的說服力。 第三部分：對刑法中的扒竊行為的認(rèn)定。首先，該部分是對扒竊行為作為“新生”罪狀的橫向分析研究，通過把扒竊行為和多次盜竊、攜帶兇器盜竊、入戶盜竊以及一般盜竊進(jìn)行對比分析，總結(jié)了扒竊行為的自身所特有的特性以及在實踐中的合理運用和區(qū)分；其次，該部分針對扒竊行為在司法實務(wù)中所面臨的問題給出了分析和解釋，尤其是在入刑后的適時理解和應(yīng)用，在綜合案例和其自身的特性后，對其概念中的爭議特征和狀態(tài)等進(jìn)行了研究，，并結(jié)合“但書”規(guī)定，確保達(dá)到社會效果和法律效果的統(tǒng)一。 第四部分：刑法中的扒竊行為的刑事責(zé)任。該部分通過對《刑修八》和兩高的司法解釋對扒竊行為規(guī)定的解讀，對扒竊行為應(yīng)當(dāng)承擔(dān)的刑事責(zé)任進(jìn)行明確。
[Abstract]:The amendment of the criminal law (eight) > the revision of the crime of theft, which has made pickpocket rise from the administrative penalty to the criminal level of criminal law. This change has caused widespread discussion in the society. This change makes pickpocket more clear to the public view, and has also promoted the efforts to combat theft of pickpocket. The great social harmfulness and serious subjective malignancy are included in the criminal category of criminal law, which coincide with the requirements of the criminal policy that our country has always advocated. A thorough analysis of the behavior of pickpocket is beneficial to the concrete application of the judicial practice, and to its own relatively vague and ambiguous characteristics. It is clear about legislation. This amendment proves that our legislation is keeping pace with the times.
In this paper, through the combing of the legislative evolution of pickpocket, the author deeply analyzes the punishment basis of the criminal law on the behavior of pickpocket, and fully affirms the reasonable nature of the action of pickpocket into punishment. Although the action of pickpocket is included in the category of penal penal punishment, and the legal provisions are given, there still exist in the current society about the application of pickpocket. In the legal predicament, the concept of pickpocket is clearly defined, and the concept of pickpocket and its own characteristics are analyzed, and the meaning of pickpocket is to secretly steal the belongings of others in public places or other open public places with the purpose of illegal possession. The constitution of the crime of pickpocket is analyzed and analyzed. The four aspects of the constitution of the crime are carefully analyzed and considered as an independent crime. It is beneficial to clarify the different and fuzzy differences in the application of pickpocket in judicial application. The ambiguous words are clearly defined, such as "public places" and "carry on". As one of the newly added charges in the crime of theft, pickpocket is necessary to distinguish several other related charges in order to make a clearer and clearer scope for pickpocket. According to the relevant suggestions, it is believed that the identification of pickpocket should be integrated with the facts of the case, the plot and the amount, the number of times and so on. At the same time, we should fully use the "proviso" in the general provisions of the criminal law to determine whether a pickpocket is a criminal category. Through a series of comparative analyses, the judicial interpretation of the eight > and the two high schools of punishment is made. The criminal responsibility of pickpocket is interpreted in the criminal law, which makes the punishment of the behavior of pickpocket in the criminal law more reasonable application and execution in judicial practice.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this article can be divided into four parts.
The first part is an overview of the behavior of pickpocket in criminal law. First, this part analyses the historical evolution of criminal law on the punishment of pickpocket, and explains the degree of punishment to pickpocket in China's criminal law from the legislative judicature since 1979. Secondly, this part analyzes the legislative basis of the crime of pickpocket entry, fully demonstrates the rationality and real time of the crime. Finally, the application of criminal punishment in the criminal law in judicial practice is analyzed in combination with the eight > penalty repair, the substantive dispute on the entry of the crime of pickpocket and the difficulties faced in the judicial practice after entering the penalty. How to solve a series of problems should be put forward.
The second part: the connotation of the behavior of pickpocket in criminal law and the constitution of the crime. First, this part analyses the essence and connotation of the behavior of pickpocket, and puts forward the views on the concept and essence of pickpocket behavior on the basis of the comprehensive study of the theories of various doctrines. Secondly, the part of this part is the law of theft. The internal characteristics of one of the convictions conforms to the analysis and interpretation of all aspects of the criminal constitution stipulated in the criminal law, which provides a powerful persuasiveness for pickpocket entry.
The third part: the identification of pickpocket in criminal law. First, this part is a lateral analysis of the behavior of pickpocket as a "new" crime. Through the comparison and analysis of pickpocket behavior and multiple burglary, carrying on the theft, burglary and general theft, it summarizes the unique characteristics of pickpocket behavior and its actual characteristics. The rational use and distinction of the practice are made. Secondly, this part gives an analysis and explanation to the problems faced by the action of pickpocket in the judicial practice, especially the timely understanding and application after entering the sentence. After the comprehensive case and its own characteristics, it studies the controversial features and state of the concept, and combines the provisions of the "proviso". Ensure the unity of social effects and legal effects.
The fourth part: the criminal responsibility of the act of pickpocket in criminal law. In this part, the criminal responsibility for pickpocketing should be clarified through the interpretation of the provisions of the judicial interpretation of the eight and the two high judicial interpretations of the criminal law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.35

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳志軍;翟金鵬;;扒竊行為特征與追訴標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的司法認(rèn)定研究[J];中國人民公安大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2013年03期

2 程歆;;淺議刑法中的扒竊——對一起扒竊案件的幾點思考[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(中旬);2012年09期

3 唐偉健;;“扒竊”入罪的理性思考[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(中旬刊);2013年08期

4 楊靜;;扒竊行為認(rèn)定的困境及出路[J];廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2013年03期

5 程裕松;論入室盜竊與扒竊的刑事責(zé)任[J];法學(xué);1991年01期

6 李宇飛;;淺析當(dāng)前扒竊案件的特點及反扒對策[J];河南公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報;2007年05期

7 李竟芬;;“扒竊入刑”中若干爭議的消解[J];湖南警察學(xué)院學(xué)報;2012年02期

8 吳加明;;《刑法修正案(八)》中“扒竊”的司法實踐認(rèn)定[J];中國檢察官;2011年14期

9 馮衛(wèi)國;論扒竊案件的控制對策[J];遼寧警專學(xué)報;2004年02期

10 劉葉;;扒竊行為的司法認(rèn)定[J];江西警察學(xué)院學(xué)報;2012年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 楊大偉;盜竊罪定罪模式研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2013年

本文編號：2033613