【作者】 王拓；

【导师】 张凌；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 刑法学， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 现代社会正步入所谓的“风险社会”阶段,在风险社会中,“技术风险”与“制度风险”构成了风险结构的基本内容。现代科技为人们带来的便捷生活的同时,也带来了连专家都难以预知和掌控的风险;市场经济制度在为经济发展带来活力的同时,也带来了前所未有犯罪的风险。人们对于风险的不安感以及由此产生的安全保障的需要,比以往任何时候都强烈了。为了应对风险,保障社会的安全与秩序,一种声音主张,刑法应当从传统的后卫地带走向前沿地带,从报应导向转为预防导向,以处罚前置化的形式实现对法益更为周密的保护,这就是“风险刑法”理论。在本文看来,风险刑法理论,是指通过规制行为人违反规范的行为导致的危险,以处罚危险犯的方式更加早期地、周延地保护法益,进而为实现刑罚的积极的一般预防目的而形成的一种新的刑法理论体系。风险刑法理论一经提出,就遭到了批判。其中,刑法谦抑主义对风险刑法理论存在的基础以及前置化处罚的效果等提出了强烈的质疑。然而,风险刑法理论体系是否一无是处,是否应受到全盘否定?如果不能否认它的存在,那么其正当性根据又是什么?如果在某些场合可以适用,又如何框定其适用的界限?既然法益保护前置化的倾向已经出现,又怎样才能避免符号化的象征刑法?现行的中国刑法,又能否足够宽容地吸纳这一理论体系?这些都是本文力求回答的问题。本文分为六部分,除了引论与代结语之外,正文分为四章:引论部分介绍了本文所使用的一种折中的研究范式。通过对法学流派的考察与对犯罪论体系发展历史的分析,本文澄清了对于折中主义的误解,进而提出了一种在方法论上演绎与归纳相得益彰、在本体论上核心刑法与刑事政策并行不悖、在解释论上存在主义与规范主义交相辉映的折中的研究范式。文章指出,风险刑法与传统刑法正是这一折中范式的“两极”,试图坚守传统刑法这“一极”而排斥风险刑法这另“一极”的做法是不妥当的。第一章介绍了风险刑法理论提出的背景,即风险社会理论。该部分首先简要介绍了风险社会理论的内容,并简要评述了该理论的缺陷与贡献。然后,文章提出了在风险社会下的刑法新课题,即安全刑法与风险刑法理论。最后,该部分指出了选择“风险刑法”而摒弃“安全刑法”称谓的原因,并对风险刑法理论的含义、地位、适用原则做了重新界定。第二章详细阐述了风险刑法理论的正当性根据。该部分首先提出了刑法的任务是保护法益还是规范这一古老的问题,在考察了法益侵害说与规范违反说的论争之后,明确了刑法的任务仍然是保护法益,但同时也指出了法益侵害说的困境与出路。然后,文章从刑法本体性根据和刑事政策性根据两个维度,通过对相关概念的厘清和对学说史的梳理,提出了风险刑法理论的正当性根据在于行为无价值论和积极的一般预防论。第三章深入探讨了风险刑法理论的核心内容,即“危险”的概念。该部分指出危险的含义多种多样,并且与危险的类型息息相关。在刑法上,危险表征的载体是危险犯。根据危险是处罚根据还是构成要件要素,危险犯可分为广义的、实质的危险犯和狭义的、形式的危险犯,本文所论述的危险犯基本上是前一种意义上的危险犯。抽象危险犯与具体危险犯构成了危险犯的两大类型,二者可以从危险的性质与危险的表现方式两个方面加以区分。未遂犯当然属于广义的危险犯的范畴,承认这一命题有助于解释处罚未遂犯的根据,至于未遂犯是何种类型的危险犯的问题,应当考虑危险犯概念的语境并采取个别化认定的思路,单纯地将未遂犯认定成抽象危险犯或者具体危险犯都是片面的。第四章对于风险刑法理论中法益保护前置化的倾向进行了展开论述。法益保护前置化的倾向,在传统类型中表现为处罚危险犯、未遂犯以及预备犯,在现代类型则表现为抽象危险犯的扩张与过失危险犯的确立。通过对危及环境安全、基因安全、信息安全、交通安全以及人的精神安全感的行为的前置化处罚的立法例与司法实践的分析,文章进一步印证了这种刑法介入早期化的趋势的合理性。同时,文章对于如何划定法益保护前置化的适用界限以及如何预防符号化的象征刑法等问题提出了初步的见解。代结语在总结本文的同时对风险刑法理论能否融入中国刑法作以展望。文章分析了风险刑法理论在中国实现的阻碍因素,指出现行刑法对于某些犯罪处罚过于后置化以及刑法与治安管理处罚法之间界限不明的弊端,最终提出了现行刑法改革的必要性、容纳风险刑法的可能性与现实性,并提出了渐进式的改革设想。更多还原

【Abstract】 The modern society has entered into a new age so-called‘‘risk society’’, in which technology risk and system risk compose the main structure of risk. Modern technology brings people convenient life as while as new risks that even experts fail to predict and control, and the market economy system not only makes the economy development vigorously but also enhances the risks of crime. People has never screamed for protecting their security like today, so a theory insists that the criminal law, in order to protect the legal interest better, should punish the crimes more earlier than before and change its aim from revenge into prevention. That is the theory of the risk criminal law. In this article, this theory is defined as a new system which uses the criminal penalty ahead of harmful consequences to realize the positive general prevention.The theory of the risk criminal law has been criticized by the subsidiary ism which strongly oppugns its base and effect. However, should this theory be totally denied? What is the fairly reason for the theory to exist? What is the proper field to apply? How to avoid the symbolization criminal law? Is there any possibility for the Chinese criminal law to adapt this theory? These topics are thoroughly discussed in this paper.This dissertation consists of six parts, except for th“eIntroduction”and“Conclusions”, the main part is composed by four chapters:“Introduction”states a compromised research paradigm. In this part, the article corrects long bias on Eclecticism and argues a compromised paradigm which includes a compromised means of both deduce and induce, a compromised foundation consisting of both criminal law and criminal policy, and a compromised base for explanation of both Ontologismus and Normativelism. The theory of risk criminal law and ruaral criminal law are the two poles of this paradigm and for which it is not a correct attitude to exclude the risk criminal law.Chapter one introduces the theory of the risk society which reveals the background of the theory of risk criminal law. After introducing the content, defects and advantages of the theory of risk society, this part argues that some new theories of criminal law should be put forward under the risk society, and these are the theory of safety criminal law and the theory of the risk criminal law. And then, this part explains the reason to abandon the former and to choose the later, and also generally states the definition, status and principles of the theory of the risk criminal law.Chapter two particularly states the just reasons of the theory of the risk criminal law to exist. After hotly discussing whether the role of criminal law is to protect the legal interest or to obey the norm, this paper considers that the theory of violating legal interest, although having some defects, is still the essence of crime. In the perspectives of criminal law and criminal policy, this paper considers that the just reasons of the theory are the theory of conduct without value and positive general prevention.Chapter three talks about the concept‘‘danger’’which is the key word of the theory of the risk criminal law. This part points out that the concept of danger has different meanings due to its different types. In criminal law, danger offence is the main carrier of criminal danger. The danger offence, which can be used as a broad sense or a narrow sense according to different classification, has its basic types which include the abstract danger offence and the concrete danger offence. The differences between these two types can be concluded from the essence and the appearance of danger. The fact that the attempt is absolutely belonged to the danger offence as a broad sense can exactly explain the reason to punish the attempt, while as to the question whether the attempt is the abstract danger offence or the concrete danger offence, it cannot be generally spoken without concrete context.Chapter four discusses the issue of protecting legal interests ahead of harmful consequences. Danger offence, attempt, and preparatory offence are the traditional types of this trend, while abstract danger offence and negligent danger offence are the modern ones. Having introduced the legislations and practices of punishing environment crime, gene crime, information crime, traffic crime and harassment crime, this article affirms the justice of this trend. In addition, this part gives its opinions on how to determine the range of the theory and prevent the symbolization criminal law.“Conclusions”firstly sums up the main idea of this dissertation, and then discusses whether the theory of the risk criminal law can be applied by the Chinese criminal law. It analyses the elements of blocking the aim, the defects of the current Chinese criminal law, the necessity, possibility and reality of the reform, and finally suggests a gradual path.更多还原