西南石油大学学报（社会科学版）
西南石油大學學報（社會科學版）
서남석유대학학보（사회과학판）
JOURNAL OF SOUTHWEST PETROLEUM UNIVERSITY(SOCIAL SCIENCES EDITION)
2015年
3期
58-64
,共7页
法条竞合%想象竞合%独立竞合%依附竞合%交叉竞合%特别法%普通法
法條競閤%想象競閤%獨立競閤%依附競閤%交扠競閤%特彆法%普通法
법조경합%상상경합%독립경합%의부경합%교차경합%특별법%보통법
concurrence of law articles%imagined concurrence%separate concurrence%attachment concurrence%cross com-peting%special law%common law
法条竞合的本质是实质一罪、假性竞合，这一点区别于想象竞合之实质数罪、真正竞合的本质。明确界定法条竞合的内涵和本质、厘清法条竞合的类型是正确适用处断原则的前提。法条竞合的类型应当从传统的纷繁复杂的划分方法中寻找新的突破口，实现类型简明化。法条竞合属于法条关系论，而不是犯罪形态论，法条竞合的本质是构成要件之间的竞合，据此可将法条竞合划分为三种类型：独立竞合、依附竞合、交叉竞合。其中独立竞合即传统上的特别关系法条竞合，应当采用“特别法排斥普通法”的适用原则，摒弃“重法优于轻法”的补充原则。
法條競閤的本質是實質一罪、假性競閤，這一點區彆于想象競閤之實質數罪、真正競閤的本質。明確界定法條競閤的內涵和本質、釐清法條競閤的類型是正確適用處斷原則的前提。法條競閤的類型應噹從傳統的紛繁複雜的劃分方法中尋找新的突破口，實現類型簡明化。法條競閤屬于法條關繫論，而不是犯罪形態論，法條競閤的本質是構成要件之間的競閤，據此可將法條競閤劃分為三種類型：獨立競閤、依附競閤、交扠競閤。其中獨立競閤即傳統上的特彆關繫法條競閤，應噹採用“特彆法排斥普通法”的適用原則，摒棄“重法優于輕法”的補充原則。
법조경합적본질시실질일죄、가성경합，저일점구별우상상경합지실질수죄、진정경합적본질。명학계정법조경합적내함화본질、전청법조경합적류형시정학괄용처단원칙적전제。법조경합적류형응당종전통적분번복잡적화분방법중심조신적돌파구，실현류형간명화。법조경합속우법조관계론，이불시범죄형태론，법조경합적본질시구성요건지간적경합，거차가장법조경합화분위삼충류형：독립경합、의부경합、교차경합。기중독립경합즉전통상적특별관계법조경합，응당채용“특별법배척보통법”적괄용원칙，병기“중법우우경법”적보충원칙。
The nature of concurrence of law articles is substantive one crime and false concurrence,which is different from that of plural crimes in imagined concurrence and that of real concurrence. Clearly defining the connotation and essence of concurrence of law article and clarifying the types of concurrence of law articles are the prerequisites for applying the principle correctly. A new breakthrough is necessary for a concise categorization of types of concurrence of law articles. Concurrence of law article is related to the theory of law relationship,rather than the theory of criminal pattern. The essence of concurrence of law articles is concurrence between constituent elements,whereby concurrence of law articles can be divided into three types:separate concurrence,attachment concurrence and cross concurrence. Separate concurrence which is traditionally called special relationship concurrence of law article is applicable to the principles of“special law exclusion of common law”and abandon the complementary principle of“serious punishment superior to light punishment”.
