【作者】 汪娜；

【导师】 邵维国；

【作者基本信息】 广州大学 ， 法学理论， 2010， 硕士

【摘要】 在刑法学界,关于违法性本质的观点,有权利侵害说、义务违反说、社会危害说、法益侵害说和规范违反说等。法益侵害说和规范违反说是其中的主流学说,两种学说的争论也一直存在于刑法理论界中。法益侵害说认为违法性的本质在于行为侵害或威胁了法益,规范违反说则认为违法性的根据在于行为违反了社会伦理。本文则认为,违法性的根据在于行为违反社会伦理规范且侵害法益。全文以此为基础进行论述,犯罪论体系也应当以此为基础来构建。违法性之“法”应包含社会法秩序,违法性的根据存在法律之外,应从社会秩序中寻找。这就是实质违法性的要旨。本文首先阐述了大陆法系违法性的相关理论,将目前关于违法性根据的学说进行简要介绍,并重点论述了规范违反说和法益侵害说的区别。规范违反说在判断违法性时首先考虑行为人的主观因素,认为刑法的目的是维护社会伦理道德秩序,主张刑法与道德不可分离,强调行为无价值,而法益侵害说的观点正好相反。规范违反说在判断违法性时首先考虑行为人的主观因素,认为刑法的目的是维护社会伦理道德秩序,主张刑法与道德不可分离,强调行为无价值,而法益侵害说的观点正好相反。在此基础上,对违法性根据的相关内涵进行论述,明确界定了违法性的“法”的概念。对规范违反说、法益侵害说的思想背景、基本内容、理论功能进行充分轮式,明确了法益和规范的含义。本文认为规范违法说的内涵是违法性本质在于违反社会伦理规范,刑法分则规定的犯罪类型大多都以伦理规范违反为基础,探讨了规范违反说的存在和发展有其必要性和合理性,同时,规范违反说也存在与刑法的人权保障机能的冲突以及造成犯罪处罚范围不明确等方面的不足。本文在论述法益侵害说时,首先将法益界定为受法保护的客观上可能受到侵害或威胁的生活利益,总结了法益侵害说的发展以及学说内部的争论问题。分析了法益侵害说的学术意义,论证其学术的合理性,但法益侵害说也存在不足,如法益概念精神化,不能将轻微违法行为与犯罪行为区分开来、不能说明未遂犯与预备犯以及正当化事由不被处以刑罚的原因。本文认为在探讨违法性根据时,应将规范违反说和法益侵害说相结合起来,将两种学说的观点相互补充,取长补短,以违反伦理规范且侵害法益作为违法性的根据,在此基础上本文提出了违法性判断的步骤,即首先规范违反判断再法益侵害判断,阐述了对结果犯、行政犯、行为犯、未遂犯和预备犯的处罚根据。更多还原

【Abstract】 Substantive illegality contains infringement of right, breach of duty, social harmfulness, infringement of legal interest, substantive illegality and so on. There is a debate about illegality essential question always includes infringement of legal interest and substantive illegality in the criminal law. In this paper, illegality lies on violation of the social ethical norm and infringe interest and criminal system should be based on it. The“law”of illegality should include social order and search from it, the base of illegality beyond the law. This is the substance of substantive illegality.This paper illustrates intellectual background, basic contents, theory function of continental law system about norm violation and infringement of legal interest. Besides, it defines the meaning of“law”of illegality, legal interest and norm and analysis the connotation of norm illegality is violate the social norm. The criminal type in the criminal law is based on the violation of norm. It exists and development of norm illegality is necessary and reasonable, but it has the shortage of the conflict with human rights protection and criminal punishment scope is not clear.The paper agree with the view of legal interest is life interest; it protected by law and maybe aggrieved and threatened, summaries the development of infringement of legal interest and internal debate question. In this paper compare and analysis the norm violation and Infringement of legal interest. Norm violation in judge of violation is considering subjective factors in the first. The purpose of criminal law is preserve social ethical norm, and emphasize criminal and ethics cannot separate, behavior is no value, but on the view of infringement of legal interest the opposite is true. But the latter view also has its shortage, it make the concept of legal interest spiritual and cannot distinguish between illegal and slightly criminal behavior, and cannot explain the reason of not penalty between attempted crime ,prepared crime and justification.The paper considers should combine norm illegality with infringement of legal interest, complement each other. According the violation of social ethic norm and infringe legal interest as violation of law. On the basis of it put forward the steps of judge violation of law, just is judge the infringement of legal interest after regulate the violation judge. In the last, the paper expounds the punishment rules about consequential offence、administrative crime、behavioral offence、attempted crime and prepared crime.更多还原