盗窃罪法益:立法变迁与司法抉择

通过对入罪判断起决定作用的目的论解释以及谨守出罪的实质解释,法益概念发挥着重要的解释论机能。对盗窃罪构成要件的解释,离不开法益观念的指导。“扒窃“、“入户盗窃“和“携带凶器盗窃“等新型盗窃行为入罪表明,盗窃罪的保护法益已经由一元的财产法益走向多元的“财产﹢人身“法益。盗窃罪保护法益的多元化必然会现实地改变其犯罪构成要件之该当。因此,只有通过法益观念指导新型盗窃罪构成要件的解释,才能得出具有实质合理性且合乎目的性的解释结论,从而为新型盗窃行为的入罪判断提供统一、规范的限定标准

逃税罪初犯免责:价值、困境与出路

逃税罪初犯免责条款所确立的二元化犯罪模式,具有发挥刑法的激励功能、提升刑法的经济效益、体现刑法的谦抑精神等方面的制度绩效。然而,作为一种纯粹利益导向式的立法,其同时存在刑法适用不公、预防效果不佳、纳税人权利保障不足等方面的现实困境。鉴于此,有必要对初犯免责条款予以立法重构,通过设置数额上限和行为要求来限制其适用范围;同时,对逃税罪的刑事处罚措施及方式进行相应的配套修正,以克服处罚范围扩大所带来的重刑化负担与刑罚单一化弊端。在立法修正之前,还可以充分利用刑法解释论的功能来弥补逃税罪处罚范围过窄的立法缺陷,并明确刑事司法机关及时介入重大逃税犯罪案件的合法性根据。国家社会科学基金重大项目“网络金融犯罪的综合治理研究”(项目编号:17ZDA148

刑事从业禁止制度的合宪性调控

刑法上的从业禁止制度实际上存在两个基本面向:一是就其在刑事制裁体系中的定位而言,属于保安处分措施;二是就其所涉公民基本权利的领域而言,属于限制职业自由权措施。因此,从业禁止之适用不仅应受保安处分的比例原则限制,而且还需同时接受职业自由权限制的\"三阶理论\"审查、其中,比例原则为从业禁止的合宪性调控提供了一个严密的分析框架,而\"三阶理论\"则在此基础上提供了一个类型化的审查基准。将前者的分析框架与后者的审查基准相结合,便可对从业禁止之适用条件分别予以合宪性限缩。只有依次通过\"偏严格审查基准\"下的适当性、必要性与相当性原则检验,从业禁止之适用方为合法且正当。国家社科基金重大项目“网络金融犯罪的综合治理研究”(项目批准号:17ZDA148)的阶段性研究成

社区矫正工作主体的认同危机与出路

由于广义层面的公众认同具有一定的抽象性和共通性,因而从工作主体这一狭义层面来定位社区矫正的公众认同更具实践意义。在我国,受落后的刑罚观念、不成熟的市民社会以及不充分的主体力量等影响,社区矫正工作主体对于这项制度及其工作均出现不同程度的认同危机,严重掣肘社区矫正功能和价值的发挥。狭义层面的社区矫正公众认同之实现,重点在于社区矫正制度建设本身,通过打造一支稳定、专业、充足的工作队伍,确立以风险评估为中心的工作机制,建立志愿服务长效机制,可以使社区矫正走上"精英之治"的道路,从而克服其在当下中国遭遇的根本性障碍。中央高校基本科研业务基金项目“刑事立法的进展与司法回应

研究生对生成性课堂的参与(笔谈)——厦门大学教育研究院“高等教育研究方法”第十三次课反思

\"高等教育研究方法\"这门课具有研究型课堂的特征。其第十三次课的主题是对反思日志做一次元研究。反思日志是学习\"高等教育研究方法\"课的重要工具,它不仅是课堂教学的缩影,而且是课堂时效的呈现,更是学生自我成长的印证。反思日志勾勒着整个课堂进程的图景,反映着学生的收获、困惑、不足以及对自己未来改进方向的认识等。第十三次课以生成式教学引导学生主动参与课堂,通过对反思日志重新审视,让学生成为思考的主体、学习的主体、研究的主体,实现自我成长、自我发现、自我唤醒的课堂教学改革目标

On problem of consequence-based liability in product criminal responsibility

以条件公式为唯一标准的传统因果关系理论,已经无法满足产品刑事责任领域结果归责的现实需求。晚近以来出现的疫学因果关系和风险升高理论,是一种与传统条件关系型因果完全不同的新兴结果归责类型。在产品刑事责任领域引入此类概率提升型因果,能有效解决实践中大量存在的由于无法将行为的不法部分与其他作用因素相分离而难以认定具体因果关系,以及一般因果法则尚不明确的结果归责难题。当然,由于概率提升型因果在本质上降低了事实关联性程度的要求,容易造成刑法归责范围的扩张,因而其在产品刑事责任中的适用范围也应受到严格限定。The traditional cause-and-effect theory which takes condition relations as the sole criterion cannot meet the practical needs of the consequence-based liability in the field of product criminal responsibility.Epidemiology and risk rising theory which has emerged recently is an entirely different type of consequence-based liability from traditional cause-and-effect condition relation.Introducing such chance-promoting cause-and-effect in the field of product criminal responsibility can effectively solve the consequence-based liability problem that cannot separate the illegal acts portion from other factors so as to identify the specific cause-and-effect,and cannot identify the general cause-and-effect.Of course,since the chance-promoting cause-and-effect essentially reduces the relevance degree of the fact,making it easy to expand the scope of criminal law liability,the scope should also be strictly limited.2017年度福建省社会科学规划项目“刑法保护前置化问题研究”(FJ2017C003

Study on the Concept and Function of Essential Joint Crime——A Chinese Characteristics Consideration of an Extraterritorial Concept

基于中外刑法犯罪论体系、共同犯罪理论及立法的差异,我国刑法必要共同犯罪概念与德、日刑法必要共犯概念存在本质区别,二者实际上是处于不同层次的两个不同概念。在我国刑法中,必要共同犯罪与任意共同犯罪的分类功能在于区别二者的法律适用方式:对于任意共同犯罪,应当结合刑法总则共犯规定定罪量刑;对于必要共同犯罪,则应当排除刑法总则共犯规定之适用,仅根据刑法分则的相应规定定罪量刑。如此分类功能蕴含着极为重要的刑法意义,它不仅可以用来划定二者所含具体犯罪类型,还能用来区分并指导必要共同犯罪的刑法分则立法,并严格限制必要共同犯罪立法的处罚范围。On the basis of the differences among Chinese and foreign crime on the system of criminal law,common crime theory and legislation,the concept of our criminal essential joint crime differentiates with Germany and Japan criminal law concepts. They are actually two various concepts in different levels. In the Criminal Code,if necessary,together with any common criminal offenses classification difference between the two lies in the way the law applies: common crimes should be sentenced by combining with the provisions of the Criminal Code General accomplice; common crimes should be sentenced by excluding the provisions of the Penal General accomplice in accordance with the corresponding provisions of the criminal law. So classification of the Penal Code contains a very important sense,it can be used not only to delineate specific offenses contained in both types,but also to distinguish and guide the necessary common crime criminal law legislation,and strictly limit the need for joint crime legislation Punishment ranges

A Study on the Standards for Conviction and Sentencing of Crimes of Embezzlement and Bribery——Considerations on the basis of Amendment( Ⅸ) to the Criminal Law

尽管《刑法修正案(九)》确立了"数额+情节"的贪污受贿犯罪定罪量刑标准,但却刻意回避了为受贿罪设置独立定罪量刑标准的重要议题,并留下诸多悬而未决的司法适用难题。贪污受贿犯罪定罪量刑标准之构建,应以贪污、受贿罪的法益侵害本质为根据,适当兼顾经济发展变化和反腐政策需求,并以域外共通性立法经验为参考而做出。基于此,应当分别构建"数额为主、情节为辅"的贪污罪定罪量刑标准和"以情节为中心"的受贿罪定罪量刑标准,并在维持现有入罪数额标准不变之基础上,以一定经济指数为参照,合理、科学确立适当反映经济发展变化的量刑动态数额标准。Although in Amendment( Ⅸ) to the Criminal Law,standards for the conviction and sentencing of crimes of embezzlement and bribery have been established as judging by " amount + seriousness",the key topic about setting up an independent conviction and sentencing standard for bribery is deliberately ignored,which leaves many problems unresolved in terms of judicial application. In fact,the establishment of the standards for conviction and sentencing of crimes of embezzlement and bribery should fully take into account the content of legal interests against embezzlement and bribery,the appropriate balance between economic development and needs of anti- corruption policy,and the common experiences of foreign legislation. Based on this,standards by " judging mainly by amount,supplemented by seriousness" and standards by " judging mainly by seriousness" should be constructed separately,while keeping the existing standards concerning the amount of bribes and taking into reference some economic index,so as to build up a flexible standards of sum for sentencing that can reasonably and scientifically reflect the appropriate changes and development of economy