【作者】 王丹；

【导师】 王莉君；

【作者基本信息】 中国青年政治学院 ， 刑法， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 从古至今,紧急状态中的生命权冲突问题都是学者们争论的焦点,实践中法官的难题。而我国紧急避险理论对于这一问题的研究尚不够深入。本文旨在于紧急避险的框架之下,运用生命权的基本理论、权利冲突的解决原则,以个案分析为视角,区分不同情形探讨对牺牲他人生命以保全自己或他人生命的行为如何定性和处理的问题。本文主要分为三个部分。第一部分讨论了“生命权之冲突”的问题。这部分阐释了本文的理论基础,分析了生命权的概念、内容、特征以及生命权的冲突问题。其中,着重论证了生命权平等保护原则。基于生命本身具有的内在价值,本文认为,无论从生命的性质层面还是从生命的数量层面来看,生命价值都不可比较,应予平等保护。第二部分讨论了紧急状态中生命权冲突的具体情形。这一部分主要论证了在具体情形下牺牲他人生命的行为是否应构成犯罪的问题。本文在此将相关行为主要分为两个情形:非危险共同体中的生命权冲突与危险共同体中的生命权冲突。在非危险共同体情形中,本文分别探讨了牺牲一个无关人生命以保全另一人生命行为与牺牲无关少数人生命以保全多数人生命行为的定罪问题。本文认为,在这种情形中,基于生命权平等原则,牺牲他人生命的行为都不应正当化。在危险共同体情形中,本文从危险共同体中生命权冲突的类型入手,介绍了解决冲突的相关理论,并在评析相关理论的基础之上,提出这一情形下生命权冲突的解决原则:即应兼顾价值合理性与手段正当性的要求来解决生命权冲突的问题。以此为标准判断,本文认为,可以将该情形下针对危险源的防御性紧急避险行为、经抽签决定牺牲者的行为以及履行事先达成的牺牲协议等行为正当化。第三部分则讨论了紧急状态中生命权冲突案件的刑罚问题。该部分主要探讨了在该类型案件中减免刑罚的三个实质理由:“无期待可能性”、“较小的恶”以及“预防必要性降低”,并在对上述理论分析的基础上提出,针对紧急状态中生命权冲突的不同情形,应分别予以减轻或者免除刑罚。更多还原

【Abstract】 In all ages, the conflict of rights to life in the emergency situation is the focus of controversy among scholars, and also a difficult problem for judges in the judicial practice. Because of the lack of research on the problem in China, this thesis discusses how to determine the nature of the act of sacrificing others’lives to save the life of one’s own or others and how to punish it, based on the theory of right to life and the settlement principle of right conflict, from the perspective of case analysing in the different emergency situations of necessity. This thesis is divided into three parts:Part One is about the conflict of rights to life which is the theoretical basis of the thesis. In this part, the concept, content, character and conflict of rights to life are analysed. The author emphasizes the equal protection of life principle and asserts life is precious because of its intrinsic value, so there is no comparison among lives whether on quality or on quantity.Part Two is about the specific cases of conflict of rights to life in the emergency situation. This part demonstrates whether the act of sacrificing others’lives should be legitimate or not. It is divided into two parts: the Non-all-in-danger Community situation and the All-in-danger Community situation. In the first part, it discusses two different types, one is to sacrifice an unrelated person’s life to save another’s life and the other is to sacrifice the lives of the unrelated minority to save the majority’s lives. In this situation, all killings should be illegitimate on the ground of equality of rights to life. In the second part, after the classification of the cases, the author introduces the related theories concerning the problem and then analyses them. Further the settlement principle of this kind of life conflict is presented, that is to give attention to both the reasonable value and the justifiable means to solve the problem. According to this standard, the defensive necessity which aims at the person who caused the danger, electing the victim by ballot drawing and carrying out the sacrifice agreement established in advance should be legitimate.Part Three is about the criminal punishment of the above cases. It discusses three essential reasons for the mitigation and annulment of punishment, including the lack of probability of anticipation, minor badness and the reduction of prevention need. After some analysis, the author holds the appinion of inflicting different punishments according to different acts, whether mitigation or annulment is based on the specific situation.更多还原