【作者】 毛冠楠；

【导师】 张凌；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 刑法学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 犯罪构成理论在国内外刑法学界被誉为刑法理论王冠上的宝石,是刑法学犯罪论的“核心问题”,其发展水平也代表着整个刑法理论的发展水平。因此对犯罪构成理论展开深入研究对提升我国刑法学研究水平具有重大意义。本文的研究目的是为司法实践正确地认定犯罪提供一个合理的标准。本文主要采用了比较分析、归纳和演绎推理的研究方法。本文共分为六个部分。引言部分介绍了我国刑法学界对我国现行犯罪构成体系的几种主要立场,同时表明了本文的立场,即重构我国现行犯罪构成体系。并作了必要的说明。本文第一章是对我国现行犯罪构成体系在宏观上进行重构,这是指犯罪构成体系整体框架的重构。第二章至第四章则是对我国现行犯罪构成体系在微观上进行重构,这是指三阶层犯罪构成体系三个犯罪成立条件内部要素的重构。第一章“我国犯罪构成体系重构之原因与模式选择”。第一节“我国犯罪构成体系重构之原因”。首先,我国现行犯罪构成体系存在着众多缺陷。其次,通过进一步对我国刑法学界存在的各种对我国现行犯罪构成体系进行部分改造的观点的反驳,本文证明了上述缺陷是通过对现行犯罪构成体系进行部分地改造不可能消除的。第二节“我国犯罪构成体系之模式选择”。在分析了我国刑法学界存在的各种重构我国现行犯罪构成体系的观点之后,认为这些观点都未能真正地消除现行犯罪构成体系存在的缺陷。通过对各种质疑引入大陆法系阶层犯罪构成体系的观点的反驳,以及对大陆法系各主要国家的各主要犯罪构成体系的比较分析,本文认为,引入新古典与目的论综合体系是消除我国现行犯罪构成体系各种缺陷的最佳途径。这一体系包括构成要件符合性、违法性、责任(有责性)三个阶层。第二章“构成要件符合性——归责之根基”。第一节“行为”。本文明确了作为构成要件符合性要素的行为的含义。并指出各主要行为理论并不是互相矛盾的,而是各有其适用范围。第二节“行为对象”。本文认为,所有犯罪都存在行为对象,行为对象是指作为独立的构成要件符合性要素被作为构成要件要素的行为所指向的人或物,其作为保护客体物质载体而存在。并提出非独立行为对象的概念。第三节“结果”。本文认为,作为构成要件要素的结果,是指行为使行为对象产生的纯粹自然意义上的实际损害或危险的客观事实,其是构成要件符合性的必备要素。第四节“因果关系”。在介绍国内外各种因果关系的理论的基础上,本文认为条件说是刑法因果关系的正确理论,但是要对条件关系公式作出正确的理解,即“如果没有某行为或某介入因素就没有该行为或该介入因素本身所造成的结果”。介绍了客观归责理论的内容,并指出其所存在的问题与缺陷。在此基础之上,本文认为,这一理论没有必要存在,并提出了实现客观归责的几点具体做法。第五节“表明行为状况的客观要素”。通过对“客观的超过要素”概念的批判与借鉴,本文确定了表明行为状况的客观要素,其主要包括:行为的方式、行为的前提条件或环境、行为人的特定身份、表明行为对象性质的规范性要素、表明非独立行为对象性质的规范性要素。第六节“主观的构成要件要素”。本文界定了构成要件故意、过失的含义。确定了构成要件事实错误的范围,并对阻却故意的构成要件事实错误作出分类。所谓主观的超过要素不存在与之相对应的客观事实的说法并不正确,主观的超过要素与客观事实实际上是对应的,只不过主观的超过要素的内容可能没有实现而已。并且指出,主观的超过要素只存在于目的犯的场合。第三章“违法性——客观归责”。第一节“违法性的本质”。本文认为违法性的本质应是形式与实质的统一,法律属性与社会属性的统一,客观的刑事违法性是违法性的本质,对刑事违法性作形式化的理解是错误的。违法行为的实质应分为三个抽象程度依次升高的层次,即客观的法益侵害——客观的权利侵害——客观的法律关系侵害。第二节“违法性的要素”。本文指出违法性的要素只包括客观的要素,主观的要素不能成为违法性的要素。第三节“违法阻却事由”。本文论证了正当化事由的判断标准应是法益衡量说,并对该说作了完善。探讨了可罚的违法阻却事由的理论前提即可罚的违法性理论,论证了可罚的违法性理论的合理性。分析了我国刑法第13条但书与可罚的违法阻却事由之间的关系,指出但书规定的合理性,并对但书的理解作了说明。第四章“责任——主观归责”。第一节“主观的责任要素”。本文指出责任能力是独立的责任要素。界定了责任故意、过失的体系地位以及含义。目的犯的“目的”也是主观的责任要素。第二节“违法性认识可能性”。在对国内外关于违法性认识的学说进行介绍与评价的基础上,本文认为,违法性认识可能性应是独立的责任要素。违法性认识可能性中的“违法性认识”应是指形式与实质相统一的客观刑事违法性的认识。此外,违法性错误不阻却故意,在无违法性认识而有违法性认识可能性时,减轻刑罚;在无违法性认识可能性时阻却责任。第三节“期待可能性”。本文在广义的期待可能性与狭义的期待可能性分类的基础上,指出责任阶层的期待可能性是狭义的期待可能性。在对各种关于期待可能性的体系地位的学说分析之后,本文认为应将将期待可能性作为第四个责任要素。在对我国刑法条文与期待可能性的关系进行分析之后,本文认为,数个刑法总则条文体现了期待可能性的思想,而且刑法第16条与第61条作为总则性规定对刑法分则条文具有普遍适用性。因此在我国对期待可能性的认定都不是超法规的。在对德日适用期待可能性的态度分析之后,本文认为不应该限制超法规地适用期待可能性。在对国内外学者的观点进行评价之后,本文认为将期待可能性的适用限制在一定的犯罪类型的范围之内是不合理的。在对各种期待可能性的判断标准进行分析之后,本文认为期待可能性的判断标准应是平均人标准与类型人标准的结合。对于期待可能性错误的性质,本文认为期待可能性的错误是关于期待可能性的前提事实的错误,因此其属于责任阶层的事实错误,而不是法律错误。此外,探讨了期待可能性错误的分类,并对其作了补充。结语部分重申了本文的观点。更多还原

【Abstract】 The theory of constitution of crime is called a gem of crown of theory of science of criminal law in foreign countries and our country. It is the“core problem”of the theory of crime of science of criminal law. Its level of development represents the level of development of the whole theory of criminal law, too. Therefore, there is an important significance in advancing the level of research into science of criminal law in our country. The purpose of research of the dissertation is to supply a reasonable criterion of ascertaining crimes for judicial practice.The methods of research of the dissertation are as follows: comparison, induction, deduction.The dissertation consists of six parts.In the introduction, the dissertation introduces several main positions of the scholars of our country on the current system of constitution of crime. At the same time, the dissertation indicates the author’s position which is to reconstruct the current system of constitution of crime. In addition, the dissertation makes some necessary explanation.Chapter one is a macroscopic reconstruction of the system of constitution of crime of our country. It means a reconstruction of the whole frame of the system of constitution of crime. From Chapter two to Chapter four, the dissertation makes a microscopic reconstruction of the system of constitution of crime of our country. It means a reconstruction of the inner factors of three conditions of the three-level system of constitution of crime. Chapter one is“The Reasons of and The Selection of a System of Constitution of Crime”.Section one is“The Reasons of Reconstruction of the System of Constitution of Crime of Our Country”. First, there are many defects in the system of constitution of crime of our country. Second, the dissertation proves that it be impossible to eliminate the defects by partially reconstructing the system of constitution of crime of our country on the basis of refuting all kinds of theories of reformation.Section two is“The Selection of a System of Constitution of Crime”. After analyzing various theories of reconstruction of the system of constitution of crime of our country, the dissertation thinks that all of the theories can’t really eliminate the foregoing defects. By refuting all sorts of theories of doubting the introduction of level system of constitution of crime of the Continental Law, and on the basis of the comparison and analysis of the main systems of constitution of crime in the main countries of the Continental Law, the dissertation thinks that the introduction of the system of combination of New Classic and Teleology Systems is the best way to eliminate the foregoing defects. The system includes three levels: satisfaction with the definition of the offense, illegality, culpability.Chapter two is“Satisfaction with the Definition of the Offense——the Foundation of Zurechnung”.Section one is“Actus reus”. The dissertation defines actus reus as the factor of Tatbestand. All kinds of theories of actus reus are not mutually repulsive. Each of them functions in the field of itself.Section two is“The Object of Actus reus”. The dissertation thinks that all crimes have objects of actus reus. The object of actus reus is an independent factor of Tatbestand which is a person or a thing as the target of actus reus. It is the material carrier of object of protection. The dissertation puts forward the conception of non-independent object of actus reus.Section three is“Effect”. The dissertation thinks that the effect as the factor of Tatbestand is the objective fact that the actus reus causes the factual harm or danger to the object of actus reus in completely natural sense. And it is a necessary factor of Tatbestand.Section four is“Causation”. On the basis of introducing various theories of causation in foreign countries and our country, the dissertation thinks that the theory of condition is correct. However, we must accurately understand the formula of relation of condition:“If an actus reus/ intervening factor doesn’t exist, the effect of itself wouldn’t exist, either.”Then, the dissertation introduces the theory of Objective Zurechnung which has many problems and defects and puts forward several concrete suggestions to realize Objective Zurechnung.Section five is“The Objective Factors Indicating the Condition of Actus reus”. The dissertation defines the objective factors indicating the condition of actus reus on the basis of criticzing and learning from the conception of“Objective Exceeding Factor”. These factors mainly include: the means of actus reus, the premise or circumstances of actus reus, the special identity of behavior, the norm factors indicating the nature of non-independent object of actus reus.Section six is“The Subjective Factors of Tatbestand”.The dissertation defines the intention/negligence of Tatbestand and limits the range of factual mistake of Tatbestand. Further, the dissertation classifies the factual mistakes of Tatbestand which hindering the intention. The viewpoint that thinks so-called subjective exceeding factors haven’t corresponding objective facts is incorrect. In fact, the subjective exceeding factors and the objective facts are entirely corresponding but the objective facts are not necessarily realized. In addition, the subjective exceeding factors only exist in the crime of intent.Chapter three is“Illegality——Objective Zurechnung”.Section one is“The Conception and Essence of Illegality”. The dissertation thinks that the essence of illegality should be the unity of form and content, and the unity of legal attribute and social attribute. The objective criminal illegality is the essence of illegality. It is incorrect to formalize the criminal illegality. The content of illegal actus reus should be divided into three levels of which abstract degree gradually rises: objective violation of legal interest, objective violation of right, objective violation of legal relation.Section two is“The Reasons of Hindering the Illegality”. The dissertation discusses and proves the criterion of judgment of the reasons of legalization is the theory of balance of legal interest which is be perfected by the author. Then, the dissertation discusses the theoretical premise of the punishable illegality which is the theory of punishable illegality proved rational by the author. The dissertation analyzes the relation between the proviso of Article 13 of the penal code of our country and the reason of hindering the punishable illegality, and points out that the proviso is reasonable. In addition, the dissertation explains the proviso.Chapter four is“Culpability——Subjective Zurechnung”.Section one is“The Subjective Factors of Culpability”. The dissertation thinks that the criminal responsibility should be an independent factor of culpability. The dissertation ascertains the situation of the intention/negligence of culpability in the system of constitution of crime, and defines the intention/negligence of culpability. The“intent”of crime of intent is also a subjective factor of culpability.Section two is“The Possibility of Consciousness of Illegality”. On the basis of introduction and review of the theories of consciousness of illegality in foreign countries and our country, the dissertation argues that the possibility of consciousness of illegality should be one of the independent factors of culpability as is the intention/negligence of culpability. The“consciousness of illegality”should be the consciousness of objective criminal illegality which is the unity of form and content. In addition, mistake of illegality can’t hinder the intention of culpability but can be a reason of reducing the punishment when the possibility of consciousness of illegality exists while the consciousness of illegality doesn’t exist. The culpability is hindered when the possibility of consciousness of illegality doesn’t exist.Section three is“The Anticipated Possibility”. On the basis of the classification of the anticipated possibility in broad sense and in narrow sense, the dissertation thinks that the anticipated possibility on the level of culpability should be the one in narrow sense. After analyzing various theories of situation of the anticipated possibility, the dissertation thinks that the anticipated possibility is the 4th independent factor of culpability. According to the analysis of the relation between the articles of penal code of our country and the anticipated possibility, the dissertation thinks that a few articles of general principles indicate the idea of the anticipated possibility. Moreover, Article 16 and Article 61 can be generally applied to all of the specific provisions of the penal code. Therefore, the extra-statute judgment of the being or degree of the anticipated possibility doesn’t exist in our country. Through analyzing the attitude of Germany and Japan to the application of the anticipated possibility, the dissertation thinks that the extra-statute application of the anticipated possibility shouldn’t be restricted. After reviewing the viewpoints of the scholars in foreign countries and our country, the dissertation thinks that it is unreasonable to restrict the application of the anticipated possibility to certain types of crime. On the basis of analyzing all sorts of theories of the criterion of the anticipated possibility, the dissertation thinks that the criterion of the anticipated possibility is the combination of the criterion of average person and the criterion of typical person. The dissertation considers the mistake of the anticipated possibility as a mistake of the facts being the foundational premise of the anticipated possibility. Therefore, this kind of mistake is a factual mistake of culpability and isn’t a mistake of law. In addition, the dissertation discusses and makes up the classification of mistake of the anticipated possibility.At the conclusion, the dissertation restates the author’s position.更多还原