【摘要】：作為刑法因果關(guān)系領(lǐng)域的通說(shuō)理論,條件說(shuō)受到了條件說(shuō)無(wú)用論、條件說(shuō)錯(cuò)誤論以及條件說(shuō)寬松論的批評(píng),但這些批評(píng)意見(jiàn)都難以成立。是否有助于查明因果關(guān)系,并不是評(píng)價(jià)包括條件說(shuō)在內(nèi)的刑法因果關(guān)系理論的合理標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。條件公式的確會(huì)在假定因果關(guān)系和擇一因果關(guān)系的場(chǎng)合得出錯(cuò)誤結(jié)論,但條件公式不等于條件說(shuō)判斷公式,而條件說(shuō)判斷公式可以在上述兩種場(chǎng)合得出正確結(jié)論。條件說(shuō)可以區(qū)分為積極條件說(shuō)和消極條件說(shuō),積極條件說(shuō)的確存在過(guò)于寬松的問(wèn)題,但目前在理論上占據(jù)通說(shuō)地位的消極條件說(shuō)并不存在這個(gè)問(wèn)題。
[Abstract]:As a general theory in the field of causality in criminal law, conditional theory has been criticized by the useless theory of conditional theory, the erroneous theory of conditional theory and the theory of leniency of conditional theory, but these criticisms are difficult to hold. Whether it is helpful to find out causality is not a reasonable standard to evaluate the theory of causality in criminal law, including conditional theory. The conditional formula does draw the wrong conclusion on the assumption of causality and the optional causality, but the conditional formula is not equal to the conditional judgment formula, and the conditional formula can draw the correct conclusion in the above two situations. Conditional theory can be divided into positive condition theory and negative condition theory. Positive condition theory does have the problem of too loose, but at present, the negative condition theory, which occupies the general position in theory, does not have this problem.
【作者單位】： 天津財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【基金】：司法部2016年度國(guó)家法治與法學(xué)理論研究項(xiàng)目一般項(xiàng)目“正當(dāng)化事由的理論建構(gòu)與司法適用研究”(編號(hào):16SFB2020)的階段性成果
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D914

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 蔣濤;崔佳;;論刑法上因果關(guān)系——條件說(shuō)與相當(dāng)因果關(guān)系說(shuō)[J];科技風(fēng);2010年05期

2 湯澤利;;因果關(guān)系判斷的理論轉(zhuǎn)向[J];法制與社會(huì);2014年08期

3 喬煥春;;我對(duì)我的愛(ài)人是怎樣由嫌棄轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)閳F(tuán)結(jié)和睦相親相愛(ài)的——土產(chǎn)公司喬煥春的自述[J];黑龍江政報(bào);1953年03期

4 閆國(guó)智;法律關(guān)系主體資格淺議──“兩條件說(shuō)”評(píng)析[J];政法論叢;1996年04期

5 王志遠(yuǎn);;實(shí)質(zhì)違法觀的續(xù)造:客觀歸責(zé)理論的真正貢獻(xiàn)[J];吉林大學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

6 鄒兵建;;論刑法歸因與歸責(zé)關(guān)系的嬗變[J];刑事法評(píng)論;2012年02期

7 ;[J];;年期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 王琳;司法改革“激進(jìn)”還是“漸進(jìn)”[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2001年

，

本文編號(hào)：2520417