刑法中的法律擬制探微
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2019-06-30 19:54
【摘要】：鑒于刑法中的法律擬制在刑法立法及司法實(shí)踐中的頗多困惑,本文分兩部分研究,第一部分旨在厘清刑法中法律擬制的含義、特征、功能、正當(dāng)性,第二部分通過分析中國刑法中的法律擬制的分類,歸納總結(jié)中國刑法中法律擬制存在的問題從而提出改善建議。本文從古往今來相關(guān)學(xué)者關(guān)于法律擬制的論述開始,探討一般性的法律擬制的含義,然后結(jié)合刑法基本原則對(duì)刑法中的法律擬制進(jìn)行界定,得出刑法中的法律擬制分為兩個(gè)層次的含義,分別用以判定是否為刑法中的法律擬制和判定刑法中的法律擬制是否適當(dāng)。第一層次的含義為刑法明文規(guī)定對(duì)于不同行為依照相同行為及其法律后果處斷的主觀構(gòu)造,第二層次的含義為價(jià)值上符合嚴(yán)格規(guī)則性、法的謙抑性以及罪刑均衡性的現(xiàn)代刑法應(yīng)然之義的主觀構(gòu)造。從而將刑法中的法律擬制界定為,刑法明文規(guī)定對(duì)于不同行為依照相同行為及其法律后果處斷的適當(dāng)性的主觀構(gòu)造。 由刑法中的法律擬制的兩層次判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),進(jìn)而分析中國刑法中的法律擬制分類,從而歸納總結(jié)出中國刑法中法律擬制的四大問題,分別為存在最高司法機(jī)關(guān)運(yùn)用法律擬制“造法”的現(xiàn)象,擬制條款太過繁冗且部分缺乏外觀特征難以辨識(shí)適用困難,擬制存在刑法萬能主義的工具主義傾向,存在法律擬制的隨意性現(xiàn)象。然后針對(duì)性地對(duì)中國刑法中法律擬制的改善提出建議,分別為嚴(yán)格限定法律擬制的主體,精簡法律擬制條款并外觀化,踐行擬制立法的實(shí)質(zhì)正義觀的同時(shí)擯棄刑法萬能的工具主義觀,應(yīng)當(dāng)審慎科學(xué)地?cái)M制立法并體現(xiàn)司法實(shí)踐的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。
[Abstract]:In view of the perplexity of the legal system in the criminal law legislation and judicial practice, this paper is divided into two parts. The first part is to clarify the meaning, characteristics, functions and legitimacy of the legal formulation in the criminal law. The second part summarizes the problems existing in the legal drafting in the Chinese criminal law by analyzing the classification of the legal drafting in the Chinese criminal law, and puts forward some suggestions for improvement. This paper begins with the discussion of legal fiction by relevant scholars from ancient times to the present, discusses the meaning of general legal fiction, and then defines the legal fiction in criminal law according to the basic principles of criminal law, and draws the conclusion that the legal system in criminal law is divided into two levels, which are used to determine whether it is the legal system in criminal law and whether the legal system in criminal law is appropriate. The meaning of the first level is the subjective structure that the criminal law explicitly stipulates that different acts should be judged according to the same behavior and its legal consequences, and the second level means the subjective structure of the modern criminal law which accords with the strict regularity, the modesty of the law and the balance of crime and punishment. Thus, the legal formulation in criminal law is defined as the subjective structure of the appropriateness of different acts in accordance with the same behavior and its legal consequences. According to the two-level judgment standard of legal formulation in criminal law, and then analyzes the classification of legal fiction in Chinese criminal law, this paper sums up the four major problems of legal fiction in Chinese criminal law, respectively, the phenomenon that the highest judicial organ uses law to make "making law", the draft clause is too complicated and some of the lack of appearance characteristics are difficult to identify and apply, and there is a instrumentalist tendency of criminal law omnipotence. There is an arbitrary phenomenon of legal fiction. Then it puts forward some suggestions on the improvement of legal formulation in Chinese criminal law, namely, strictly limiting the subject of legal formulation, simplifying and externalizing the provisions of legal formulation, practicing the view of substantive justice of draft legislation and abandoning the universal instrumental view of criminal law, and should carefully and scientifically formulate legislation and reflect the experience of judicial practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D924
本文編號(hào)：2508205
[Abstract]:In view of the perplexity of the legal system in the criminal law legislation and judicial practice, this paper is divided into two parts. The first part is to clarify the meaning, characteristics, functions and legitimacy of the legal formulation in the criminal law. The second part summarizes the problems existing in the legal drafting in the Chinese criminal law by analyzing the classification of the legal drafting in the Chinese criminal law, and puts forward some suggestions for improvement. This paper begins with the discussion of legal fiction by relevant scholars from ancient times to the present, discusses the meaning of general legal fiction, and then defines the legal fiction in criminal law according to the basic principles of criminal law, and draws the conclusion that the legal system in criminal law is divided into two levels, which are used to determine whether it is the legal system in criminal law and whether the legal system in criminal law is appropriate. The meaning of the first level is the subjective structure that the criminal law explicitly stipulates that different acts should be judged according to the same behavior and its legal consequences, and the second level means the subjective structure of the modern criminal law which accords with the strict regularity, the modesty of the law and the balance of crime and punishment. Thus, the legal formulation in criminal law is defined as the subjective structure of the appropriateness of different acts in accordance with the same behavior and its legal consequences. According to the two-level judgment standard of legal formulation in criminal law, and then analyzes the classification of legal fiction in Chinese criminal law, this paper sums up the four major problems of legal fiction in Chinese criminal law, respectively, the phenomenon that the highest judicial organ uses law to make "making law", the draft clause is too complicated and some of the lack of appearance characteristics are difficult to identify and apply, and there is a instrumentalist tendency of criminal law omnipotence. There is an arbitrary phenomenon of legal fiction. Then it puts forward some suggestions on the improvement of legal formulation in Chinese criminal law, namely, strictly limiting the subject of legal formulation, simplifying and externalizing the provisions of legal formulation, practicing the view of substantive justice of draft legislation and abandoning the universal instrumental view of criminal law, and should carefully and scientifically formulate legislation and reflect the experience of judicial practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D924
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條
1 李鳳梅;;法律擬制與法律類推:以刑法規(guī)范為視角[J];法學(xué)雜志;2006年01期
2 王偉國;;司法解釋單獨(dú)適用之爭[J];民主與法制;2009年17期
3 張明楷;;立法解釋的疑問——以刑法立法解釋為中心[J];清華法學(xué);2007年01期
4 褚玉龍;梁亞維;;司法解釋無權(quán)修改法律——評(píng)最高法[2006]1號(hào)司法解釋第六條[J];人大研究;2006年04期
5 李振林;;盜竊罪中的法律擬制問題研究——以《刑法修正案(八)》第39條的規(guī)定為視角[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期
6 趙運(yùn)鋒;張東平;;論刑法分則中的法定擬制[J];行政與法;2008年03期
7 吳錦展;;論罪責(zé)刑相適原則及司法實(shí)現(xiàn)[J];知識(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì);2010年19期
8 吳波;李振林;;我國刑法總則中的法律擬制規(guī)定評(píng)析[J];云南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(法學(xué)版);2013年06期
，本文編號(hào)：2508205
本文鏈接：http://lk138.cn/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2508205.html
