帮助犯论文：帮助犯 中止 有效性.doc

中文摘要】共同犯罪作为一种特殊的犯罪形态,无论在刑法理 论还是在刑法实践领域中都具有重要的地位,也一直是学者们关注的 重点然而,一直以来,对共同犯罪的研究都是围绕共同正犯和教唆犯 展开的,对帮助犯的研究,却不够深入,成果相对更少,只有刘凌梅老 师的博士论文对之作过专门研究,其前其后都鲜有著作产生犯罪中 止作为现代刑事立法中普遍设立的一种刑事制度,它强调行为人主观 方面的弃恶从善,而为犯罪行为人悬崖勒马驾设了一座后退的“黄金 桥”由于学者们对帮助犯研究的忽视,帮助犯的中止问题更是鲜有人 提及,但在司法实践中帮助犯在犯罪过程中自动中止犯罪的情况是大 量存在的,因此有必要对这一问题作深入探讨帮助犯属于共同犯罪 的范畴,帮助犯的性质有从属性、独立性和二重性之说,本文认为,帮 助犯既有从属性的一面,也有独立性的一面,但更侧重于独立性帮助 犯中止问题属于共同犯罪中止中的一个问题,在共同犯罪中止的认定 上,国外主要存在着客观主义、主观主义及折衷主义三种主要观点, 这三种不同的理论在实践中也都有不少国家采用,它们从不同的角度 出发,各有利弊,相对而言,折衷主义认为应从主客观两方面相结合来 认定共同犯罪中止问题的观点较为科学。

以折衷主义学说为基础,在 帮助犯中止的成立上,一般认为应当符合时间性、自动性、有效性三 个条件,但对其中的时间性、自动性尤其是有效性的具体内容又有很 大争议本文着重对帮助犯中止的有效性进行了探讨,并借鉴国外准 中止和共犯脱离理论,得出了帮助犯中止认定的三个标准：时间性——从帮助犯实施帮助行为开始,至正犯犯罪既遂为止；自动性——自动中止犯罪；有效性——阻止了既遂结果的发生或消除了对既遂结果发生的原因力总体而言,本文从帮助犯的性质及共犯中止的理论入 手,通过对帮助犯中止有效性的讨论,并在借鉴大陆法系国家有关共 同犯罪中的准中止理论和共犯脱离理论后,全面分析了帮助犯中止的 成立条件、认定标准及法律后果,对帮助犯中止理论和立法上的完善 提出了一些建议,以期为帮助犯中止理论研究作出自己微薄的贡献英文摘要】As a special form of crime, the joint-crime has animportantrolebothin criminallawtheoryandcriminallaw practice.Ithas beenthe focusofscholars. However,we study the crime has been around common perpetrator and instigator. Theresearchofoffenderswhohelpisnotenoughandtheresults is less. Only my teacher Lingmei Liu's doctoral thesis made a special study of offenders who help. Before and after that very little work is produced. As a common penal system establishedinthemoderncriminallegislation,thesuspension of crime emphasizes the evil become good in the subjective aspects. It sets up a driving back“golden bridge” for the perpetrator. Because scholars have ignored the study on offenderswhohelp,theproblemofthesuspensionofoffenders who help is rarely mentioned. However, offenders who help automatic suspending the crime is abundance in judicial practice. Then it is necessary to make a depth study on this issue.Offenders who help belong to a common concept of the joint-crime. The nature of offenders who help have the said of the guilty property, independenceand the duality. This paper argues that the nature of offenders who help have both property side and independent side, but focus more on independence. The suspension of offenderswho help is a problem of joint-crime. On identificating the suspension of joint-crime, the foreign key exists objectivism, subjectivism, and eclecticism of three main points. These different theories are adopted by many countries. They look at the issue from different perspectives, each has advantages and disadvantages. Relatively speaking, the eclectic view combines both subjective and objective to• 1 j • r* • • • j • rpl • ・ ・ •identify suspension of joint-crime. This view is more science. Based on the eclectic theory, we generally believe that suspension of offenders who help shall comply with the timeliness, arbitrary and effectiveness. But there is considerable controversy on the content of timeliness, arbitrary and effectiveness. This article focuses on stay of the effectiveness of offenders who help. And we learnfrom the foreign quasi-suspensionand an accomplice theory, we have come to three criteria about suspension of help prisoners.1,Timeliness-- start from offenders who hel'p s implementation of the helping behavior, to implement crime accomplished.2, Arbitrary--automatic suspend the crime.3, Effectiveness-- prevente the occurrence of the result accomplished or eliminate the causes of the results.Overall, this paper starts from the nature of offenders who help and suspension of joint-crime. We study on the effectiveness of suspension of offenders who help and learn from the quasi-suspension and an accomplice theory in civil law countries. This paper makes a comprehensive analysis of suspension of offenders whohelp of conditions of stay, assessment standards and the legal consequences.And this article will help the suspension of offenders who help perfect on the theory and legislation, putting forward some suggestions to make my modest contribution.【关键词】帮助犯 中止 有效性【英文关键词】offenders who help suspensioneffectiveness【目录】帮助犯中止问题研究 摘要4-5 Abstract 5-6 引言 9-11 (1) 研究的意义与选题背景 9 (2) 文献综述与研究方法 9 (3) 论文结构安排 9-11 1 帮助犯的概念及性质 11-17 1.1 帮助犯的 基本概念 11-13 1.1.1 帮助犯 11-12 1.1.2 帮助故意 和帮助行为 12-13 1.2 帮助犯的性质 13-17 1.2.1 帮 助犯性质之争 13-15 1.2.2 帮助犯性质之我见 15-17 2 帮助犯中止的相关学说 17-21 2.1 帮助犯中止学说论争17-19 2.1.1 客观主义学说 17-18 2.1.2 主观主义学 说 18 2.1.3 折衷主义学说 18-19 2.2 帮助犯中止学说 辨析 19-21 3 帮助犯中止的成立条件及法律后果21-31 3.1 帮助犯中止的成立条件 21-28 3.1.1 帮助 犯中止的时间性、自动性 21-25 3.1.2 对帮助犯中止有效性的 讨论 25-28 3.2 帮助犯中止的法律后果 28-31 3.2.1 对帮助犯的处罚 28-29 3.2.2 对中止犯的处罚29 3.2.3 对帮助犯中止的处罚 29-31 4 帮助犯中止的 认定 31-41 4.1 帮助犯中止的认定标准探讨31-36 4.1.1 准中止理论 31-33 4.1.2 共犯关系脱离 理论 33-35 4.1.3 帮助犯中止的认定标准 35-36 4.2 帮助犯中止的具体认定 36-39 4.2.1 以帮助犯为视角36-38 4.2.2 以帮助行为为视角 38-39 4.3 片面帮助 犯的中止 39-41 4.3.1 片面帮助犯的性质 39-40 4.3.2 片面帮助犯的中止 40-41 5 帮助犯中止完善的建议41-46 5.1 帮助犯中止的理论完善 41-42 5.1.1 借鉴 准中止犯理论 41-42 5.1.2 引入帮助犯脱离理论42 5.2 帮助犯中止的立法完善 42-46 5.2.1 将帮助犯 在刑法中予以明确规定 42-43 5.2.2 将帮助犯的准中止纳入中止范畴 43-44 5.2.3 增设共同犯罪中止条款 44-46结语 46-47 参考文献 47-49 致谢 49-50 个人简 历、在学期间发表的学术论文与研究成果 50采买全文 】1 399。