摘要
在我国刑法中,除危害国家安全罪和贪污贿赂罪之外,在其他各类犯罪中都规定了“严重后果”,涉及60余个分则条文、近80个罪名。“严重后果”包括概括的“严重后果”、半概括的“严重后果”、被包括的“严重后果”和明确具体的“严重后果”四种类型;其中,概括的“严重后果”在包含“严重后果”的各种情形中均有分布,且出现频率最高。“严重后果”具有抽象性、客观性、不特定性、整体性、事实与价值的双重属性等特点,具有决定犯罪成立的功能和综合评价功能,其立法价值表现为能够满足我国法律体系的基本需求和限制处罚范围。在“严重后果”的主观归责上,形成了有认识说和无认识说两种学说,但各自只具有片面合理性,均无法充分解释“严重后果”。应当坚持类型化思维,将“严重后果”分为与行为之间具有类型性的“严重后果”和与行为之间不具有类型性的“严重后果”,并针对前者和后者分别坚持有认识说和无认识说,才是有效解释“严重后果”的理想选择。
ion,objectivity,indeterminacy,integrity,duality of fact and value,etc.“Serious consequence”has the function of determining the establishment of a crime and comprehensively evaluating.Setting“serious consequence”as the constituent element of some crimes can meet the requirement of China’s legal system and eff ectively limit the scope of punishment.On subjective imputation about“serious consequence”,knowing theory and unknowing theory have been formed,but each of them has only one-sided rationality and cannot fully explain“serious consequence”.We should adhere to typological thinking,divide“serious consequence”into“serious consequences”with type between behavior and“serious consequences”without type between behavior,and adhere to epistemology and non-epistemology respectively for the former and the latter,which is the ideal choice to eff ectively explain“serious consequences”.
出处
《政法论坛》
北大核心
2023年第4期121-133,共13页
Tribune of Political Science and Law
基金
国家社科基金项目“生态文明时代环境刑法方法问题研究”(20BFX073)的阶段性成果
关键词
“严重后果”
类型化思维
有认识说
无认识说
“Serious Consequence”
Typological Thinking
Knowing Theory
Unknowing Theory
