CAJ | 학술논문

司法实践中在认定发廊手淫服务是否属于刑法意义上的卖淫行为时存在较大争议，导致不同法院对此类案件作出有罪、无罪两种不同判决。学界对此问题同样存在肯定说和否定说两种观点。从同一法律概念在不同部门法的语境中可能存在不同含义，以及以社会危害性作为依据不具备衡量属性并且从刑法解释的一般理性的角度而言，提供手淫服务不应属于刑法意义上的卖淫行为。司法实践中对此存在认识差异的原因主要在于不同主体在认定此问题时分别采用了行政法思维模式与刑法思维模式。而由于两种思维模式在思维特征、适用范围以及逻辑线索等方面存在较大差别，因而如果不加区分地适用就会导致不适当的甚至是错误的结论，在对刑法问题进行思考和认定时应适用刑法思维而非行政法思维。
사법실천중재인정발랑수음복무시부속우형법의의상적매음행위시존재교대쟁의，도치불동법원대차류안건작출유죄、무죄량충불동판결。학계대차문제동양존재긍정설화부정설량충관점。종동일법률개념재불동부문법적어경중가능존재불동함의，이급이사회위해성작위의거불구비형량속성병차종형법해석적일반이성적각도이언，제공수음복무불응속우형법의의상적매음행위。사법실천중대차존재인식차이적원인주요재우불동주체재인정차문제시분별채용료행정법사유모식여형법사유모식。이유우량충사유모식재사유특정、괄용범위이급라집선색등방면존재교대차별，인이여과불가구분지괄용취회도치불괄당적심지시착오적결론，재대형법문제진행사고화인정시응괄용형법사유이비행정법사유。
There’s m uch controversy w hen pondering over w hether the m asturbation service provided in barber shop belongs to prostitution in the sense of crim inal law in our country’s judicial practice, thus causing tw o kinds of court judgm ents of guilty or innocence.To this point,there are tw o academ ic opinions：Positive Theory and N egative Theory. For one legal concept m ay have different m eanings in different branch law ,and taking social harm fulness as the basis have no attribute of m easurem ent,m asturbation service does not belong to prostitution in the sense of crim inal law ,also w ith the perspective of interpretation of crim inal law ’ general rationality. A large gap in perceptions exists in judicial practice m ainly due to different groups have adopted adm inistration law thinking m ode and crim inal law thinking m ode.It m ay produce inappropriate or even w rong conclusions w ith indiscrim inate use of these tw o thinking m odes,for they have different thinking characteristics, scope of application, logic routes etc.W e m ust use crim inal law thinking m ode instead of adm inistration law thinking m ode w hen considering and identifying a crim inal law issue.