【作者】 吴学斌；

【导师】 张明楷；

【作者基本信息】 清华大学 ， 民商法学， 2005， 博士

【摘要】 我国传统的刑法适用模式偏好于单向的演绎法律推理,局限于纯粹的概念分析,割裂规范与事实相互依存的关系,这种机械的思维导致了法律形式主义在刑事司法实践中的肆虐,以此推导出的结论经常偏离正义和事物的本质。论文在批评法律形式主义和演绎盲信的基础上,对构成要件符合性判断中的主要问题从方法论的角度进行了深入、详细的研究。遵循没有刑法理念就没有刑法规范,没有刑法规范就没有案件事实的司法信仰,本文认为,要想在构成要件符合性判断中获得成功的结论,离不开法律理念的指引。超越法律形式主义、在构成要件指导下形成案件事实以及法律推理的类型思维是整个构成要件符合性判断中不可或缺的基本理念。对构成要件的合理诠释是刑法适用的基础和重点。本文在对构成要件和构成要件要素一般理论进行评析的基础上,确立了以正义性、安定性以及合目的性为合理诠释的标准,以引导当前纷乱复杂的刑法解释思维。对传统的刑法解释方法进行了重新定位,认为目的解释并不是一种普通的解释方法,毋宁是一种解释的指向。目的解释在文义解释、体系解释、历史解释中占有支配性的地位。对构成要件之外影响构成要件诠释的客观因素进行了理性的分析和引导。在案件事实的形成领域,确立了案件事实在整个构成要件符合性判断中的核心和敏感的地位。案件事实形成的好坏,直接决定了刑法适用的成败。案件事实必须在构成要件的规范意义下形成。案件事实的形成与构成要件的诠释是双向互动的。本文对案件事实形成的重要原则和常见方法进行了针对性的研究。在构成要件符合性判断中提倡法律的逻辑推理,有助于培养司法的职业思维,提高刑法适用的客观性和可操作性,也有利于法律推理中大、小前提的正确形成。本文分别对演绎法律推理、归纳法律推理以及类比法律推理在构成要件符合性判断中的运行模式及难题进行了剖析,强调刑法规范在所有法律推理中不可动摇的权威地位。本文的基本进路是,构成要件符合性判断的结果必须符合刑法的基本价值和存在意义。通过对构成要件的规范分析,将刑法规则蕴含的正义品质阐释出来,在案件事实形成以及在寻求当为与存在心融神恰的对应中,证成刑法的社会性、目的性与合理性。更多还原

【Abstract】 Traditional application paradigm of criminal law in China is limited to aunidirectional legal reasoning deduction and pure concept analyzes, it cuts off therelationship between facts and rules. This kind of mechanical thinking leads to thedominant position of legal formalism in the criminal judicatory practice, and oftenproduces conclusions which are far from justice and essence of things. On the basis ofcriticizing legal formalism and the blind believe in deduction methods, this papercarries a thorough and detailed study on each area of judgment of conformity betweenconstructive requirements of crime and facts of cases from the angle of methodology.This paper first researches on the ideas which should be embodied in thejudgment of conformity between constructive requirements of crime and facts ofcases. The basic ideas in the application of criminal law are the transcendence of legalformality, the formation of facts of cases under the direction of constructiverequirements of crime, and type-thinking. In the field of constructive requirementsnorm analyze, this paper doesn’t mention some cliché in the criminal lawhermeneutic, instead, it puts forward a reasonable interpretation criterion takingjustice, stability, purposefulness into full consideration, by which the complexcriminal law interpretation thought could be channeled, on the basis of discussing andanalyzing the general theory of constructive requirements of crime and elements ofconstructive requirements of crime. Furthermore, this paper reintegrates traditionalcriminal law interpretation methods, holds that teleological interpretation is not amethod of construction but a direction in the construction process, and semanticinterpretation, systematic interpretation and historical interpretation shall be guidedby teleological interpretation. It also analyzes objectively how the factors besides theconstructive requirements of crime influence the interpretation process ofconstructive requirements of crime. The fact of a case is the core in the judgment ofconformity between constructive requirements of crime and facts of cases, whoseimportance is as well as the constructive requirements of crime themselves. Theformation of the fact in a case will directly decide the effectivity of the application ofcriminal law. This paper holds that the fact in a case shall be formed under the normmeaning of constructive requirements of crime, the formation of the fact in a case andthe interpretation of constructive requirements of crime is a two-way street. Then, thispaper researches on principles and methods in the formation of the fact in a case,especially on social factors influencing the formation of the fact in a case. Toadvocate logical legal deduction in the judgment of conformity between constructiverequirements of crime and facts of cases will help in forming professional judicialthinking and in enhancing the objectivity and operability of criminal law application.In the end, this paper analyzes the operation modes and problems of deductive legalreasoning, inductive legal reasoning and analogy legal reasoning in the judgment ofconformity between constructive requirements of crime and facts of cases,emphasizes the dominant position of criminal law rules in all legal reasoning methods,and corrects mistakes in the operation of legal reasoning.The basic approach of this paper is to express the justice nature of criminal lawthrough norm analyses of constructive requirements of crime, and to approve thesociality, purposefulness and rationality of criminal law in the formation of facts ofcases and the pursue of the very correspondence between facts and rules. To sum up,the result of judgment of conformity between constructive requirements of crime andfacts of cases should conform to the basic values and purposes of criminal law.更多还原