摘要
我国《刑法》第22条对于预备犯采普遍处罚原则,引发了学界较大争议。鉴于该条与"但书"条款形式上的冲突关系、普遍处罚与刑法谦抑主义的背离、主观证明上存在的"刑事证据的盲点"以及"准备工具""制造条件"边界的模糊不清而给司法操作带来的可操作性困局,主流观点认为预备犯采例外处罚原则为宜。对此,理想的路径是基于解释论的视角,以行为惯性基础上的法益侵害说、刑事近代学派主张的社会防卫论作为理论根据,坚持预备犯的普遍处罚理念的基本立场,纠正传统观点对于预备犯条款与但书条款关系认识上存在的误区,通过类型化方法的运用,对预备犯处罚范围加以限缩。至于学界主张的主观证明上的困难等导致司法实践对该条款近乎弃之不用,其实是一个伪命题,司法实务中已有判例,并不鲜见。
In Article 22 of the Criminal Law,the principle of universal punishment for preparatory crime has caused considerable controversy in the academic circle.In view of the formal conflict between this article and the provisos,the deviation between the general punishment and the criminal law’s principle of modesty,the"blind spot of criminal evidence"existing in the subjective proof,and the operability dilemma caused by the ambiguous boundary between"preparation tools"and"manufacturing conditions",the mainstream view is that it is advisable to adopt the principle of exceptional punishment for the preparatory crime.In this regard,the ideal path is to adhere to the basic standpoint of the general punishment concept of preparatory crime,correct the misunderstanding existing in the traditional view of the relationship between the provisions of the preparatory crime and provisos,and limit the scope of punishment for preparatory crime through the use of typed methods based on the perspective of interpretative theory,with the theory of infringement of legal interests based on behavioral inertia and the theory of social defense advocated by the modern criminal school as the theoretical basis.As for the difficulty of subjective proof claimed by the academic circle,which led to judicial practice to abandon this clause,it is actually a false proposition.It is not uncommon to see precedents in judicial practice.
出处
《法学杂志》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第6期119-127,共9页
Law Science Magazine
基金
国家社科基金项目“风险治理视阈下刑事立法的界限研究”(项目编号:19XFX003)的阶段性研究成果
陕西省高校青年创新团队“大数据时代社会治理创新中的刑事法治”的阶段性研究成果
关键词
预备犯
犯罪预备
普遍处罚
类型化
preparatory crime
preparation for a crime
general punishment
typification
