广州大学学报:社会科学版
廣州大學學報:社會科學版
엄주대학학보:사회과학판
Journal of Guangzhou University(Social Science Edition)
2014年
7期
45~50
,共null页
非典型超法规违法阻却事由 概念 构成要件 根据
非典型超法規違法阻卻事由 概唸 構成要件 根據
비전형초법규위법조각사유 개념 구성요건 근거
atypical supra-law justifiable causes;concepts;constitutive requirements;bases
为了实质公正地处理刑事案件,必须把违法阻却事由分成三类:一是法定违法阻却事由,二是典型超法规违法阻却事由,三是非典型超法规违法阻却事由。非典型超法规违法阻却事由是指形式上符合犯罪客观要件且侵害了刑法法益的行为,由于保护或促进了当地社区绝大多数人的现实生产、生活利益,当地群众普遍认为不违法,所以虽然不符合法定违法阻却事由和典型超法规违法阻却事由的条件,但根据利益权衡仍能阻却刑事违法的情况。在刑法理论和司法实践中承认和采纳非典型超法规违法阻却事由具有合理性,但必须严格掌握它的构成要件,深刻理解其阻却违法的根据仍在于利益权衡。
為瞭實質公正地處理刑事案件,必鬚把違法阻卻事由分成三類:一是法定違法阻卻事由,二是典型超法規違法阻卻事由,三是非典型超法規違法阻卻事由。非典型超法規違法阻卻事由是指形式上符閤犯罪客觀要件且侵害瞭刑法法益的行為,由于保護或促進瞭噹地社區絕大多數人的現實生產、生活利益,噹地群衆普遍認為不違法,所以雖然不符閤法定違法阻卻事由和典型超法規違法阻卻事由的條件,但根據利益權衡仍能阻卻刑事違法的情況。在刑法理論和司法實踐中承認和採納非典型超法規違法阻卻事由具有閤理性,但必鬚嚴格掌握它的構成要件,深刻理解其阻卻違法的根據仍在于利益權衡。
위료실질공정지처리형사안건,필수파위법조각사유분성삼류:일시법정위법조각사유,이시전형초법규위법조각사유,삼시비전형초법규위법조각사유。비전형초법규위법조각사유시지형식상부합범죄객관요건차침해료형법법익적행위,유우보호혹촉진료당지사구절대다수인적현실생산、생활이익,당지군음보편인위불위법,소이수연불부합법정위법조각사유화전형초법규위법조각사유적조건,단근거이익권형잉능조각형사위법적정황。재형법이론화사법실천중승인화채납비전형초법규위법조각사유구유합이성,단필수엄격장악타적구성요건,심각리해기조각위법적근거잉재우이익권형。
In order to handle criminal cases in a just way , justifiable causes must be divided into three catego-ries:the statutory justifiable cause , the typical supra-law justifiable cause , and the atypical supra -law justifiable cause .Atypical supra-law justifiable cause refers to a specific situation where an act encroaches on criminal legal interests and conforms to the objective circumstances of a crime in form , but because of the protection or the promo-tion effect brought by such act on local community's rights and interests of production and living standards , it is not deemed as illegal by the local people .Thus, although it does not conform to the conditions of the statutory justifia-ble cause or the typical supra -law justifiable cause , the criminal act can be justified according to the benefits bal-ance.It is reasonable to adopt the atypical supra -law justifiable cause in judicial practice and criminal law theory on the condition that its constitutive requirements have been fully grasped , and that the ground of justification still lies in the benefits balance .