【作者】 尹华蓉；

【导师】 杨兴培；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法大学 ， 刑法学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 亲告罪是成文法系国家所独有的一种刑法现象。本文主要通过立法例研究、历史研究、比较研究和实证研究的方法,对亲告罪的合理范围进行论述。在立法例研究中,主要是对中国自唐以来的主要朝代的律文、以德国与意大利为例的大陆法系国家的刑法典、我国现行刑法和台湾地区刑法进行了梳理,对各时期、各国家和地区的亲告罪规定及立法理由作了列举和总结。而在对中国自唐代至清代的律文分析中,用历史研究的方法,结合各时代的社会背景及制度特征对中国传统亲告罪范围规定的特点进行总结。在对古今中外的亲告罪规定的整理之外,通过比较的方法展示了因时代的变迁、文化的差异和法律观念的更新给亲告罪范围的张缩带来的影响。最后,结合司法中刑事和解的实践及面临的困境,从实证的角度分析亲告罪的合理范围与当前中国的司法现实相契合的可能性与必要性,指出亲告罪在现行刑法中可适用的罪名范围。全文由七部分组成。导论中,首先对研究亲告罪范围的意义及国内研究现状予以介绍,并对本文的研究对象、方法及思路进行了阐述。与非亲告罪相比,亲告罪更多地体现了个人权益与公共利益之间冲突与平衡,尊重被害人意愿与维护社会秩序间的博弈,打击犯罪与刑法谦抑性的拉锯,实体法和程序法的衔接。亲告罪制度内容广泛,既包括此类罪的性质、罪名范围,还包括相关制度内容及司法实践中的运用等方面。其中,亲告罪的价值和意义集中表现在罪名范围的确定上,其范围的确定标准决定了罪名范围大小及其发展趋势,也必然影响亲告罪的纠纷解决机制的构建。因此,亲告罪的范围作为亲告罪制度的核心问题,有相当的理论研究价值。在我国,司法实践中亲告罪呈现极冷极热的奇怪现象,与现行刑法对亲告罪范围的立法的狭窄及程序法规定的粗陋有密切的关系。因此,从探索适合我国现状的亲告罪立法与司法改革方案的角度看,将亲告罪的合理范围作为主题展开论述,也具有相当的实践价值。当然,国内外对于亲告罪的研究已有相当的积累。就掌握的有限资料看,国外对亲告罪的有两个特点,一方面,国外通说将亲告罪的告诉条件作为诉讼条件之一,故而,对于亲告罪的研究更侧重于程序设计；另一方面,大多学者都认同从私权益、隐私性、亲属关系等方面来解释亲告罪范围确定的思想。国内对亲告罪的研究则呈现多彩的特征,当然,也不乏对亲告罪范围的讨论。其中,有的从自由、权利、效率等基本范畴进行考察,有的从传统文化、刑法谦抑思想、诉讼便利和节约等多种角度进行分析,有的侧重对比中外立法例等等,得出亲告罪应当扩大的结论。也有少数论者反对盲目扩大亲告罪范围。本文试图在总结现有研究成果的基础上,推进亲告罪范围的研究向纵横发展。纵向是指从历史的角度,探析古今亲告罪的社会基础及变化,明确亲告罪范围的发展趋势；横向是指从中外比较的角度,透视现代亲告罪应然的价值考量和适用范围。第一章概述。首先通过对各国和地区刑法中对亲告罪的措辞和含义进行整理,给出亲告罪在本文中的定义,其是指在刑事法中,必须由告诉权人请求司法机关追究行为人的刑事责任才予以刑罚处罚的一类犯罪。继而,就亲告罪的性质进行了探讨。由于“告诉条件”的存在与否,是亲告罪与非亲告罪的核心区别,告诉条件的性质决定了亲告罪的性质特征,因此,对亲告罪性质的论述表现为告诉条件的分析。在国外刑法学界的通说中,告诉条件被视为诉讼条件,具有阻碍诉讼进程的程序性特征。而国内对于告诉条件的性质则众说纷纭,观点有十余种之多。本文在介绍各种观点的同时,指出亲告罪的告诉条件具有程序性和实体性的双重属性,在程序性上告诉条件表现为诉讼条件,在实体性上其属于刑罚阻却事由,并可纳入“不法与责任以外的附加要素”。亲告罪的双重性质决定了,对亲告罪范围的研究应当结合实体与程序两个方面来开展。第二章对中国古代亲告罪范围及近代转型进行列举和比较,分析了中国古代亲告罪罪名稀少的原因,阐释了古代亲告罪的合理性和不足之处,并对近代以来亲告罪的急剧变化与原因进行探讨。古代的告诉制度既是私人自我救济的途径,又是国家实现社会控制和监视私人的重要工具。亲告罪是限制告(亲亲相隐)的例外,其体现了中国古代皇权与父权(夫权)之间的博弈,其结果必然是亲告罪范围极为狭小。古代中国亲告罪是古代中国刑法伦理化的具体体现和必然产物。而清末民初,社会急剧动荡,西学东渐对刑法的影响尤其突出。在反思中国传统伦常观念之后,中国选择效仿和临摹西方大陆法系刑法模式,使得清末民初的刑法从立法技术、法律体系、罪名内容等等都焕然一新。自由、权利等观念的渗入,使得亲告罪在清末民初的法律中改头换面。第三章通过对建国后亲告罪花分两枝的立法变化来佐证我国现行亲告罪的完善应以扩大适用范围为方向。涉及两个内容：一是,专门就新中国的亲告罪在立法进程中的变化进行整理。其中,两种较为极端的观点值得反思：提倡严格限制甚至取消亲告罪的观点,是基于对国家政权能力的憧憬,认为国家应当大包大揽,可以无所不能；而将亲告罪扩张至较为恶性的犯罪观点,更多是基于人民内部矛盾与敌我矛盾的区分观念而提出的。这两种观点都忽视了人类社会的复杂性、法律的有限性、国家权力与个人权利之间的存在博弈,导致对亲告罪的价值认识不足。这也造成我国现行刑法中的亲告罪范围过窄,且呈现一定的随意性的局面。二是,通过梳理中国台湾地区现行刑法中亲告罪范围变化的脉络,以及结合亲告罪的立法理由,对台湾地区扩大亲告罪范围的立法主张予以肯定。观察台湾地区刑法亲告罪适用范围的增删,可以发现,一方面,社会传统、社会秩序和社会效果是设立亲告罪的主要考量因素,另一方面,立法者从不放弃保护个人自由和独立地位的立场。作为同源而分道扬镳的大陆和台湾地区在亲告罪范围的规定上,优劣立判。第四章仅选取德国和意大利为例进行分析,讨论了两个国家亲告罪规定的特点。德国和意大利刑法典同时在总则和分则中对亲告罪的相关内容进行了规定。总则一般围绕告诉权内容展开,而分则包括数十种亲告罪。两国的亲告罪范围都较广泛,规定的方式和内容却因两国的立法理念、立法技术等差别而有所区别。但两国的亲告罪“告诉”条件都制约了国家刑罚权的实现,却非绝对排除国家权力的介入。第五章首先对亲告罪确立的法理基础进行阐述,然后再通过对清末、民初、新中国、中国台湾地区、德国、意大利的亲告罪一一列举,分析各时期、各国家和地区亲告罪的结构和性质,指出亲告罪是国家在避免被害人遭受二次侵害的思想下,针对侵害个人法益的部分罪名设定的。从亲属或特殊关系、侵犯名誉或隐私、危害轻重等三个方面对亲告罪范围的影响进行分析,据此提出采用轻微危害性作为亲告罪的合理依据和适用范围,是我国特定历史时期刑法立法指导思想的特有产物,已不符合当代中国的政治环境、经济现状、社会观念和科技水平。重构我国亲告罪范围的可在中等以下罪中进行选择。第六章针对司法实践中,刑事和解面临的正当性依据的质疑,也面对和解范围如何确定的难题,本文建议以被害方与加害方协商内容是否涉及刑罚内容为标准区分刑事和解与刑事调解,在此基础上,重构亲告罪范围与完善刑事和解制度。亲告罪为刑事和解提供实体法基础,而刑事和解的司法实践为亲告罪范围的合理性提供事实依据。即,将刑事和解的案件范围限于亲告罪,而刑事调解适用于非亲告罪；同时,通过刑事和解的实践情况,对亲告罪的范围进行验证和修正,从而确定目前现行刑法中亲告罪的应然范围。更多还原

【Abstract】 The crimes to be handled only upon complaint are the special phenomenon of the continental law system. In this paper, through legislation research, comparative study, empirical research method, historical research method etc., this thesis aims to discuss the reasonable range of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint. Through the legislation research method, this paper is mainly to introduce China’s related legal provisions since the Tang Dynasty and the relevant regulations in criminal codes of Germany and Italy just as an example of the continental law system countries. Based on the regulations, legislative reasons are listed and summarized. While in Chinese related legal provisions analysis, this part used the methods of historical research method to combine with the social background and summarized the system characteristics of the Chinese traditional crimes to be handled only upon complaint. At the same time, comparative method were used to show the scope change of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint because of the time, culture difference and the renewal of legal concepts. Finally, combined with the judicial practice of criminal reconciliation and the dilemma that faced, the paper used the perspective of empirical analysis to confirm the reasonable scope and the possibility and necessity between the criminal reconciliation and the crimes to be handled only upon complaint in current Chinese judicial. This paper attempted to summarize the existing research results, and to seek the change trend of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint.The thesis consists of seven parts. The instruction introduced the research significance and the domestic research status of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint, and then elaborated the objects the research methods and the line of argument in this paper. Compared with the crimes handled without complaint, the crimes to be handled only upon complaint pay more attention on the conflicts between individual rights and the public interests, the relations of the victim’s intention and the maintenance of social order, the balance of the tough on crime and the modest restraining, and the cohesion the substantive law and the procedural law. The system content of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint is extensive, including both the nature of such crimes, crimes range, relevant system and judicial practice etc. Above all, the scope is the core of the system. In China, puzzled phenomenon in judicial practices of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint had close contact with the narrow legislation of criminal code and the rough criminal procedure law. Therefore, the exploration of the reasonable scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint has the theory value and the practice value.The first chapter is the summary. Firstly, through listing and interpreting the wording and meaning in the criminal law of various countries and regions, this part given the definition of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint. It means:the crimes will be punished only by the victim appeal the judiciary to investigate, prosecute or trial. After that, these crimes’nature was discussed. The condition-" complain"-exists or not, is the core difference between the crimes to be handled only upon complaint and others crimes. So, the character of the "complaint" was the key to discuss the nature of these crimes. In foreign criminal law, "complaint" regarded as procedural conditions, hindered the process of criminal procedure. In China, there are more than ten kind’s opinions. After introducing various ideas, this paper pointed out that the "complaint" had procedural and substantive dual attribute. In the criminal procedure, the "complaint" existed or not was the factor to affect the process. Their substantive characteristic was a cause of preventing penalty, and can be incorporated into the" illegal and responsibilities outside the additional elements". By the dual nature of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint, the scope research should be discussed from the substantive and procedure aspects.The second chapter listed and compared the Chinese ancient and modern transformation of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint. Then, the paper analyzed the scarce reasons of these crimes, interpreted the rationality and deficiency of the ancient crimes, and explained the rapid change phenomenon. The ancient "complain" system is a private relief way, is also the important tool for nation to control social and surveillance persons. The crimes to be handled only upon complaint were exceptions in the Concealment system between relatives, which embodies the conflict between the Chinese ancient imperial authority and patriarchy. Therefore, the scope of these crimes were inevitable very narrow. And at the end of the Qing Dynasty, the criminal law was especially influenced by the social turbulence and the Eastward Transmission of Western learning. Through critical review of the traditional ethics, the late Qing Dynasty’s criminal law opted to follow and copying western continental law legal system mode, so that the legislative technology, legal system, content of the legislation and so on changed dramatically. At the same time, the crimes to be handled only upon complaint were completely different.The third chapter described the legislation changes of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint after 1949.Abased on it; this paper supported the view of expanding application scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint. The third chapter involved two contents:1. sorting out the legislative changes and the reasons of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint in current criminal law of China. There were two kinds of extreme views needed to consider:one was to advocate strict restrictions or even cancel these crimes, which was based on the point of view that the nation power can be equal to anything; the other one was expansion the scope to more serious crimes, which based on the distinguish concept of the contradictions among the people and the contradictions between ourselves and the enemy. These two kinds of viewpoints indicated the inadequate knowledge about the value of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint, because ignored the complexity of human society, the legal limitation, shifting between the state power and personal rights. It also caused our current scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint is too narrow, and present certain arbitrariness.2. through citing the changing range and legislative reasons of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint in Taiwan present criminal law, to affirm the achievements. By the scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint changes in Taiwan province, this paper put forward that the scope of these crimes in Taiwan area better than those of domestic. In two aspects:on one hand, social tradition, social order and social effect was the main factors of these crimes to be established; on the other hand, the legislators insisted on the protection of personal freedom and independence status position. The fourth chapter taking the Germany and Italy for example, argued the characteristics of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint, and discussed the standard of the scope in crimes. At the same time, the criminal codes in Germany and Italy defined the related contents of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint. General provisions ruled the system of "complaint", and specific provisions ruled the crimes. The scopes of the crimes in two countries were more extensive, but the manner and content varied because of the legislative ideas and techniques different. In the two countries criminal codes, the "complaint" of the crimes restrict the state power of punishment, but not absolutely preclude the intervention of the state power. By comparison with international scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint, domestic legislation is too narrow. Therefore, we should expand the scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint, by establishing the reasonable standard.The fifth chapter analyzed the structure and properties of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint. Firstly, this part elaborated the legitimacy to regulate the crimes to be handled only upon complaint. Through listing the structure and properties of these crimes in China from late Qing Dynasty to now, Taiwan province, Germany, and Italy, the paper pointed out that in avoiding the secondary victimization, the crimes to be handled only upon complaint aimed to protect the individual legal interests. Then it discussed three aspects of the influence on the scope of these crimes: relatives or other special relationships, defamation or invasion of privacy, and harm degree. Minor harm as the standard determined the reasonable and applicable scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint, did not accord with the current political environment, economic status, social concept and level of science and technology in China. Reconstruction of our country’s scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint was imperative.The sixth chapter discussed the possibility and the feasibility to combine the criminal reconciliation and the crimes to be handled only upon complaint. In judicial practice, criminal reconciliation’s the legitimate foundation was questioned, and its range was difficult to determine. The paper proposed a standard to distinct criminal reconciliation and criminal mediation, that was the consultative contents involved punishment or not. At the same time, the criminal reconciliation cases range is limited to the crimes to be handled only upon complaint, while the criminal mediation applicable to the crimes without complaint. Then, the author redefined the scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint and perfection of criminal reconciliation system. Through argumentation, the author suggests to enlarge the scope of the crimes to be handled only upon complaint in China. In addition, through the analysis of criminal reconciliation and criminal mediation of two different restorative justice program, this paper combined such crimes with the criminal reconciliation, and put forward:to get rid of the criticize of "reducing the punishment with money", the legitimacy of the criminal reconciliation should be confined to the crimes to be handled only upon complaint.更多还原