摘要
抽象危险犯的“危险”来自于类型化的行为本身,是法律拟制的危险,刑法以修正案的形式大量增设抽象危险犯在保护法益的同时也冲击了我国传统刑事违法和行政违法二元处罚体制,与刑法的谦抑性存在一定冲突,潜在着不当限制公民自由的危险。适用刑法第13条但书的规定出罪及允许反证的做法在理论上均存在难以自洽之处;对构成要件进行解释时,应坚持以具体犯罪保护的法益为指导进行实质解释,将不具有刑事可罚性的行为排除于构成要件之外;根据责任主义原则,认定犯罪时要重视对行为人主观方面事实的考察,防止因客观归罪导致抽象危险犯处罚范围的不当扩大。
The“danger”of the abstract potential damage offense comes from the typified act itself,which is the danger of the legal fiction.In the form of amendments,a large number of abstract dangerous crimes are added to the Criminal Law,which not only protects the legal interests,but also impacts the traditional dual punishment system of criminal and administrative violations in China,which conflicts with the modesty of the Criminal Law,and has the potential of improperly restricting civil liberties.In theory,there are some difficulties in applying the proviso of Article 13 of the Criminal Law to the practice of offering a crime and allowing counter evidence.When explaining the elements,we should adhere to the specific legal protection of the crime as a guide to achieve substantive explanation and exclude the acts that do not have penalties from constituent elements.In accordance with the principle of responsibility,it is necessary to pay attention to the subjective aspect of the perpetrator to prevent the improper expansion of the scope of the abstract potential damage offense due to the objective guilty.
作者
相吉江
XIANG Ji-jiang(The Fourth Procuratorial Department of the Third Branch of Tianjin People’s Procuratorate,Tianjin 300450,China)
出处
《天津法学》
2020年第1期62-67,共6页
Tianjin Legal Science
关键词
抽象危险犯
限制
实质解释
责任主义
potential damage offense
limitation
substantive explanation
responsibility
