不纯正不作为犯的中国命运:从快播案说起
发布时间：2018-09-18 07:44
【摘要】：快播案的背后,反映了学理上不限制不纯正不作为犯的边界,导致司法实践中滥用不纯正不作为犯、脱离实行行为而只根据法益保护需要定罪。中国的立法模式不同于德日,总则没有设立原则处罚不作为的拟制规定,重罪法条是以行为危险为核心。因而,以法益保护为由在中国处罚不纯正不作为犯,违反罪刑法定原则。考虑到中国文化给定了一些重罪的作为形象,立法者也预设了重罪的作为性质,应当否认重罪存在不纯正不作为犯,把一些需要处罚的不纯正不作为犯解释为作为犯和过失犯。
[Abstract]:Behind the fast-broadcast case, it reflects that the boundary of the non-pure omission crime is not restricted in theory, which leads to the abuse of the innocent omission crime in the judicial practice and the conviction only according to the need of legal interest protection. The legislative model of China is different from that of Germany and Japan. Therefore, it is against the principle of legality to punish the crime of nonfeasance on the grounds of legal interest protection in China. In view of the fact that the Chinese culture has given the image of some felonies, the legislator also presupposes the nature of the felonies. We should deny the existence of the felonies, and interpret some innocent omission offenders that need punishment as acts and negligent crimes.
【作者单位】： 浙江大学光华法学院;
【基金】：司法部课题“量刑对定罪的反作用力研究”(13SFB2019) “中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助”项目的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D924.3;D920.5
本文编号：2247250
[Abstract]:Behind the fast-broadcast case, it reflects that the boundary of the non-pure omission crime is not restricted in theory, which leads to the abuse of the innocent omission crime in the judicial practice and the conviction only according to the need of legal interest protection. The legislative model of China is different from that of Germany and Japan. Therefore, it is against the principle of legality to punish the crime of nonfeasance on the grounds of legal interest protection in China. In view of the fact that the Chinese culture has given the image of some felonies, the legislator also presupposes the nature of the felonies. We should deny the existence of the felonies, and interpret some innocent omission offenders that need punishment as acts and negligent crimes.
【作者单位】： 浙江大学光华法学院;
【基金】：司法部课题“量刑对定罪的反作用力研究”(13SFB2019) “中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助”项目的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D924.3;D920.5
【参考文献】
相关重要报纸文章 前1条
1 陈兴良;;在技术与法律之间：评快播案一审判决[N];人民法院报;2016年
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前2条
1 卢君;王庆;;不纯正不作为犯罪的司法认定——基于形式作为义务和实质作为义务的比较研究[J];法律适用;2013年05期
2 ;[J];;年期
相关重要报纸文章 前3条
1 中国人民大学教授、博士生导师 赵秉志 上海社会科学院研究员、法学博士 肖中华;不纯正不作为犯的认定（上）[N];人民法院报;2003年
2 中国人民大学教授、博士生导师 赵秉志 上海社会科学院研究员、法学博士 肖中华;不纯正不作为犯的认定（下）[N];人民法院报;2003年
3 刘金林;“激”人自杀：作为还是不作为犯罪[N];检察日报;2003年
相关硕士学位论文 前1条
1 付双庆;不纯正不作为犯之作为义务[D];西南政法大学;2016年
，本文编号：2247250
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/falilunwen/2247250.html
