【作者】 李川；

【导师】 何秉松；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 法学理论， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 本文全文包括导言、正文和结语三个组成部分。导言部分介绍了刑罚目的研究的理论和现实意义、刑罚目的研究的现状及其局限性、以及本文的研究视角和体系安排。正文部分由传统刑罚目的理论的反思、刑罚目的理论的重构与法治视野下刑罚目的新体系三部分组成。首先，传统刑罚目的理论的反思部分从介绍传统刑罚目的理论并批判其内部逻辑缺陷开始，试图在探究这些缺陷的背后原因基础上寻求新的理论研究视角。传统刑罚目的研究形成了相对固定的理论模式，即刑罚目的理论只涉及报应和预防两种元素，一切的刑罚目的理论都是围绕着这两种元素展开。然而不管报应元素和预防元素，其内部都存在着长期不被注意的矛盾和冲突：前者是在道德报应和法律报应之间，后者是在一般预防和特殊预防之间。而且法律报应同一般预防之间比预防元素内部各组成部分之间具有更紧密的逻辑关系。这表明传统的刑罚目的体系存在逻辑问题，需要新的认识角度重新构造。而考察报应和预防各自内部冲突的背后原因，可以发现这些逻辑问题是对法治背景的忽略造成的。法治视角应该成为我们研究和构造新的刑罚目的理论的出发点。其次，刑罚目的的重构部分从法治这个时代背景出发，考察了法治视野中刑罚目的的概念和特征，并在此基础上考察了法治影响下刑罚目的的具体变化，从而在充分考虑法治两方面特征影响的基础上重构刑罚目的体系。第一，刑罚目的概念可分为历史性的广义概念和现代性的狭义概念两类，体现法治影响的刑罚目的概念仅指狭义的刑罚目的概念。在法治的影响下，刑罚目的具有层次性、主观意志性、历史性与现代性三个基本特征，这些基本特征保证了刑罚目的体系构造的科学性。第二，在区分刑事法律和法治的基础上，本文考察了法治的内涵及其对刑罚目的的结构性影响。法治包括形式和实体两个层面的特征，刑罚目的从这两个层面受到了法治的影响。从前法治时代到法治时代，刑罚的目的发生了很大的变化：在形式层面的法治影响下，维护法律秩序成为最重要的刑罚目的，刑罚不能绕过或破坏这个目的直接追求价值目的。在实体层面的法治影响下，与现代法治相适应的一系列现代价值成为刑罚所追求的价值对象。第三，既然法治对刑罚目的有如此巨大的决定性影响，就要按照法治的逻辑对刑罚目的理论进行重构。就法治形式层面影响来看，法律至上的形式法治使得在报应元素内，法律报应占据了垄断地位，并取得了对道义报应的独立和优位；同时形式法治的逻辑同预防元素内一般预防逻辑相适应，使得一般预防的机制在法治条件下能充分发挥作用。所以法律报应跟一般预防同时都符合形式法治的逻辑，也都符合维护法律秩序、保障法律规范的目的，可以统一视为法律防卫目的。而在法律防卫目的的基础上，存在价值防卫的更高目标。而价值内容的确立受到了法治实质层面的那些价值判断的决定和影响，使得价值防卫可以和法律防卫相适应。法律防卫和价值防卫都是刑罚目的，但是构成了手段跟目的的关系。法律防卫目的的实现是为了进一步实现价值防卫目的，法律防卫是刑罚实现价值防卫的必要阶段。不能绕过或违反法律防卫目的实现价值防卫，这是由法治所决定的。法治一方面是时代要求的社会治理方式，决定了法律防卫刑罚目的的地位。但是另一方面，法治也具有一定的局限性，这源于法律的局限性，由此决定了法律防卫具有一定的局限性。正是在批评刑事法律局限性的基础上，新派思想家提出了刑罚个别化和以社会防卫和特殊预防为内容的社会防卫刑罚目的论。这种社会防卫刑罚目的有效的弥补了法律防卫刑罚目的的不足，成为一种补充性的刑罚目的。所以整个刑罚目的体系就演变为以法律防卫—价值防卫目的为主轴，辅以社会防卫目的补充的新内容。在主体部分的最后内容，本文展开了对重构的刑罚目的体系的充分论述，这是本文论述的主要内容。第一，作为体系之基础的法律防卫目的，是指刑罚对法律秩序和规范的维护。从内涵上看，作为法律防卫对象的“法律”包含三个层次：刑法规范、法规范和法秩序。而“防卫”包含两种含义：已经受到破坏的法规范效力的恢复和保障尚未受到破坏的法效力不受破坏。从组成部分看，法律防卫包括法律报应和一般预防两大内容。一方面，法律报应包含两重特点：一是刑罚通过对犯罪的报应维护法效力，二是作为报应机制的罪刑因果关系和均衡关系均由法律决定。而其实现机制是法定罪刑均衡。另一方面，一般预防在法治条件下的特点在于：一是通过威慑未来可能犯罪发生保障法效力，二是借助法律的逻辑实现其消极预防为基础、并结合积极预防的双面预防主义。而其实现机制是法观念的威慑机制和鼓励守法机制。进一步说，同作为法律防卫的组成部分，法律报应与一般预防具有整合的可能性和必要性。从实现机制上看，法律防卫通过法律报应和一般预防的机制实现。从我国刑事立法和司法实践的角度看，为满足法律报应的罪刑均衡机制和一般预防的双面预防机制，需要改进许多制度设置。第二，价值防卫目的的对象包含主观价值观和客观价值体两个方面。而刑罚学界关于法益说和规范说之争论体现了对价值含义究竟是采用价值体还是价值观的争议。在笔者看来价值体和价值观不仅不是对立的，而且是互补的和不可分割的。刑法所保障的价值观，同一般社会多元道德价值观是不同的，因法定而具有国家意志性、最低道德性、文化独特性和普遍性的特点。刑罚所保障的价值体，通说认为是以法益为主体，借助法益保护从而实现对其他价值体的保护。法治条件下的重要的其他价值体包括人权、秩序和正义等。第三，为缓解法律防卫局限性，我们需要纳入补充性的社会防卫目的，其意义在于超越法律的僵化性进行个别化的特殊预防。社会防卫目的的根基在于社会防卫论，以特殊预防为其内容。这决定了社会防卫刑罚目的体现刑罚个别化逻辑，采用事后不定期刑和个别教育矫正制度，这与法律防卫的抽象逻辑相矛盾。面对这种矛盾，新社会防卫论为我们的研究提供了一定的借鉴。对人身危险性特征类型化并与刑罚相对应就成为社会防卫实现补充作用的基本机制。这种类型化一方面可以与法律防卫所要求的刑罚一般化和抽象化相适应；另一方面又保留了刑罚的个别化的一些特征，仍然可以坚持相对意义上的特殊预防。贯彻类型化机制于刑事立法、司法和执行过程中，要进行相应的制度改进。结语部分总结了本文所体现出的刑法学研究方法论意义。传统刑罚目的理论之所以对法治的背景有所忽视，原因在于学科分化所造成的传统刑法学封闭的研究领域和技术性的研究方法。而刑罚目的理论的研究属于刑法学新兴的理论刑法学的研究范围，特别是对法治背景的考察要求刑法学必须结合法理学、宪法学等法学基本理论研究，开放刑法学的研究领域和方法。更多还原

【Abstract】 The entire dissertation includes three parts: introduction, body and conclusion.The part of introduction clarifies the theoretical and practical significance of the research on purposes of punishment, the present situation and limitation of the research on purposes of punishment, and the approach and clue of this dissertation.The body includes three parts: introspection of traditional theories of purposes of punishment, reconstruction of theory of purposes of punishment and the new system of purposes of punishment on the approach of rule of law.At the beginning, the part of introspection begins with the introduction of traditional theories of purposes of punishment and criticizes of their logical defects, and tries to find a new approach of the research on the basis of inquiry on the deep reasons of those defects. Traditional theories of purposes of punishment shaped a relative concrete theoretical pattern, that is, the traditional theories only concerns about the two elements: retribution and prevention, and all the traditional theories spread around the two elements. However, no matter retribution or prevention, there is long-ignored inner contradiction and conflict; for retribution, it is between legal retribution and moral retribution, and for prevention, it is between general prevention and individual prevention. Moreover there is more tight logical connection between legal retribution and general prevention than between general prevention and individual prevention. Those all indicate that there are logical problems in traditional system of theories of purposes of punishment and need to be reconstructed under new approach. And in consideration of the deep reasons of respective inner conflicts of retribution and prevention, we can see those are caused by the neglecting of background of rule of law. So the approach of rule of law is our threshold of research and construction of new theory of purposes of punishment.Next, the part of reconstruction of purposes of punishment considers the concept and features of purposes of punishment from the approach of the contemporary background of rule of law, and reconstructs the system of purposes of punishment in full consideration of the two features of rule of law. At first, in concern of the concept of purposes of punishment, it can be divided into historical broad sense and modern narrow sense. The one that reflects the influence of rule of law is the narrow one. Under the influence of rule of law, the purposes of punishment have three basic features: Hierarchical, subjective and modern, and these three features guarantee the scientific feature of the construction of system of purposes of punishment.In the second place, on the basis of distinction between criminal law and rule of law in criminality, I inspect the contents of rule of law and its influence on the structure of purposes of punishment. Rule of law includes two features, formal and substantial, that influence purposes of punishment. From the era before rule of law to the era of rule of law, purposes of punishment have taken great changes. Under the influence of formal rule of law, to keep the order of law is the most important purpose of punishment, and punishment can not get directly to other purpose of value by ignoring or ruining this purpose. Under the influence of substantial rule of law, a serial of modern substantial values in accordance with rule of law become the valuable objectives of purposes of law.Thirdly, since rule of law has so great decisive influence on purposes of punishment, we should reconstruct system of purposes of punishment in consideration of the influence of rule of law. From the influence of formal rule of law, the formal rule of law’s law first makes legal retribution occupies the predominant position in the system of retribution and is independent from and prior to moral retribution. At the same time, logic of rule of law is accorded with general prevention in system of prevention and that makes general prevention fully realized under rule of law. So legal retribution and general prevention both conforms to logic of rule of law and the purpose to preserve the order of law and safeguard the legal norms. They can be regarded as the law-safeguarding purpose.There is a higher purpose of value-safeguarding beyond the purpose of safeguarding law. The contents of value-safeguarding purpose are affected and decided by the value judgment of substantial rule of law, which makes the purpose of safeguarding value in accordance with the purpose of safeguarding law. The purposes of law-safeguarding and value-safeguarding both are purposes of punishment, and have a relationship of method and purpose. The purpose of safeguarding law is realized for the purpose of safeguarding value, so the law-safeguarding purpose is the necessary method for the realization of the purpose of safeguarding value. The realization of the purpose of safeguarding value can not avoid or destroy the purpose of safeguarding law, which is decided by rule of law.On the one hand, rule of law is the way of social regulation of our times, and decides the status of the law-safeguarding purpose. On the other hand, however, rule of law has some weakness, which is originated from the limitations of law and decides the limitations of law-safeguarding purpose of punishment. It is on the basis of criticizes of limitations of criminal law, that thinkers of new school developed individualism of punishment and society-safeguarding purpose that includes the contents of social safeguarding and individual prevention. The society-safeguarding purpose recovers the defects of law-safeguarding purpose and becomes a kind of supplementary purpose of punishment. So in conclusion, the system of purposes of punishment becomes new contents that include the main part of law-safeguarding and value-safeguarding purposes and supplementary part of society-safeguarding purposes.At the last part of the body, the reconstructed system of purposes of punishment is fully developed, which is the main part of the dissertation.Firstly, as the basis of the system, law-safeguarding purpose means that punishment should preserve the legal order and norms. The "law" as the object of safeguarding law includes three aspects: norms of criminal law, legal norms and legal order. And the "safeguard" includes two meanings: resuming the power of legal norms that has been destroyed and preventing the power of legal norms that has not been destroyed from being destroyed. As for the contents, safeguarding law includes legal retribution and general prevention. On the one hand, legal retribution has two features, that is, the preservation of punishment for power of law through retribution to the criminals, and causal and equivalent relationships between crimes and punishment, as the function of retribution, both are decided by law. The realization of legal retribution depends on law-deciding equivalence between crimes and punishment. On the other hand, features of general prevention are preservation legal power through deterrence of potential crimes in the future and dual prevention of fundamental passive prevention as well as positive prevention. And the realization of general prevention depends on deterrence by legal notions and inspiration of law-abiding. Furthermore, as the components of legal safeguarding, legal retribution and general prevention is possible and necessary to be integrated. Considering the method of realization, safeguarding law is realized by the functions of legal retribution and general prevention. To satisfy the function of equivalence of crimes and punishment of legal retribution and dual prevention function of general prevention, a lot of institutions should be improved in the practice of criminal legislation and jurisdiction.Secondly, the objects of safeguarding value include subjective idea of values and objective substance of values. And the dispute between the theories of legal interest and legal norms suggests the dispute whether values include idea of values or substance of values. And I think idea and substance of values are not confronted with each other and can supply each other. Idea of values protected by punishment is different with normal multi-idea of the society, and has four special features, that is, state-will, lowest moral level, culture distinction and generalization. Substance of values protected by punishment, in generally speak, is mainly legal interests, through which punishment realize the protection of other kinds of substance of values. However, legal interests can not represent all the substance of values, and other kinds of substance of values include human rights, order, and justice and so on.Thirdly, to retrieve the limitation of law-safeguarding purposes, we need apply the supplementary society-safeguarding purpose. Society-safeguarding purpose means individual prevention over the rigidity of law. The basis of safeguarding society lies in the theory of safeguarding society, and has contents of individual prevention. That decides that the purpose of safeguarding society suggests the individualized logic of punishment and adopts punishment of prison of indefinite period after judgment, as well as individual education and correction, which has conflict with abstract logic of law-safeguarding purpose. For resolving the conflict, new society-safeguarding theory gives us some experience. It becomes the basic way of supplementary society-safeguarding purpose to classify the personal dangerous characters and correspond to all kinds of punishment. The classification method can accommodate to generalization and abstraction of punishment as safeguarding law demands on one hand, and on the other hand keep some character of individualization of punishment, which means individual prevention to some extent. To implement the classification into criminal legislation, jurisdiction and execution, some institutions should be improved. The conclusion part expresses the meaning of method of criminal law research of the dissertation. Traditional theories of purposes of punishment ignore the background of rule of law because that traditional research has closed area and technical method of research caused by division of branch of research. The research of purposes of punishment belongs to the area of new theoretical research of criminal law. The consideration of background of rule of law in the research demand the combination of research of criminal law with basic research of legal theory, such as jurisprudence and constitutionalism and opening of the area and method of research of criminal law.更多还原