以罪名为讨论平台的反思与纠正

Reflection on and Correction of Taking Crime Title as the Discussion Platform in Criminal Law Research

成果信息
DC信息
传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属学者：

丁胜明

归属院系：

法学院

作者：

丁胜明1

摘要：

我国刑法学界存在以罪名作为问题讨论平台的现象,但是,由最高司法机关确定的罪名与刑法规定的犯罪构成之间大多并非一一对应的关系,"多罪一名"是我国罪名体系的显著特征,以罪名作为问题讨论平台会带来诸多理论上难以妥善处理的问题。在刑法学研究中,应当严格区分罪名和犯罪这两个概念。刑法学的研究对象是犯罪,讨论刑法问题的基本平台只能是犯罪构成而不是罪名,分析刑法问题的基本单元是"一个犯罪构成"而不是"一个罪名"。罪数中的"罪"是指犯罪构成而不是罪名,具体的事实认识错误是指"同一犯罪构成"内的事实认识错误而非"同一罪名"内的事实认识错误,罪过是犯罪构成的罪过而非罪名的罪过。

语种：

中文

出版日期：

2020-05-15

学科：

刑法学

收录：

中国科技核心期刊; CSSCI

提交日期：

2020-07-22

引用参考：

丁胜明. 以罪名为讨论平台的反思与纠正[J]. 法学研究,2020(03):143-159.

全文附件授权许可：

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 以罪名为讨论平台的反思与纠正
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 丁胜明
  • dc.contributor.author
  • DING Shengming
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.publisher
  • 法学研究
  • dc.publisher
  • Chinese Journal of Law
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2020
  • dc.identifier.issue
  • 03
  • dc.identifier.volume
  • v.42;No.248
  • dc.identifier.page
  • 143-159
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2020-05-15
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 罪名;犯罪构成;罪数论;错误论
  • dc.subject
  • crime title;crime constitution;quantity of crime;mistake
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 我国刑法学界存在以罪名作为问题讨论平台的现象,但是,由最高司法机关确定的罪名与刑法规定的犯罪构成之间大多并非一一对应的关系,"多罪一名"是我国罪名体系的显著特征,以罪名作为问题讨论平台会带来诸多理论上难以妥善处理的问题。在刑法学研究中,应当严格区分罪名和犯罪这两个概念。刑法学的研究对象是犯罪,讨论刑法问题的基本平台只能是犯罪构成而不是罪名,分析刑法问题的基本单元是"一个犯罪构成"而不是"一个罪名"。罪数中的"罪"是指犯罪构成而不是罪名,具体的事实认识错误是指"同一犯罪构成"内的事实认识错误而非"同一罪名"内的事实认识错误,罪过是犯罪构成的罪过而非罪名的罪过。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • There is a phenomenon of taking crime title as the discussion platform in the research of criminal law in China, which has caused many confusing problems in quantity of crime, mistake, mens rea, etc. The titles of crimes in China are determined by judicial interpretations, which do not strictly follow the principle of "one crime constitution, one title", but make extensive use of the method of "one sort of crime constitution, one title". Therefore, crime title and crime constitution in China are not always in one-to-one correspondence, "multiple crimes, one title" is a prominent feature of China's crime title system. It's necessary to strictly distinguish crime constitution from crime title, and abandon the approach of taking crime title as the discussion platform in criminal law research. The object of criminal law research is crime. Therefore, the center of the discussion platform of criminal law is crime constitution, not crime title. Accordingly, the basic unit of analysis in criminal law is "a crime constitution" rather than "a crime title". The "crime" in the "quantity of crime" refers to crime constitution rather than crime title. If an offense meets several crime constitutions under one title, we should make full use of the principle of prohibition against double evaluation and the requirement for overall evaluation to assess the quantity of crime. A concrete mistake refers to "a mistake within a crime constitution", rather than "a mistake within a crime title". The discussion of the form of mens rea should be based on crime constitution rather than crime title.
  • dc.description.sponsorshipPCode
  • 16SKJD10
  • dc.description.sponsorship
  • 重庆市教委人文社会科学研究项目“刑法解释学视角下‘确定罪名’制度的重构”(16SKJD10);西南政法大学青年教师学术创新团队资助项目的成果
  • dc.identifier.CN
  • 11-1162/D
  • dc.identifier.issn
  • 1002-896X
  • dc.identifier.if
  • 6.259
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D924.3
回到顶部