【作者】 梁统；

【导师】 薛进展；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法学院 ， 刑法学， 2004， 硕士

【摘要】 亲告罪是对犯罪在立法上进行分类的结果,是犯罪的一个基本类型。我国刑法学界近几十年来,对亲告罪有了一定程度的研究,尤其是1997年后,亲告罪开始得到关注,不少学者对此也专门撰文予以论述,但都显得较为零散,大都集中在亲告罪的比较和借鉴上,而对亲告罪的系统研究、特别是对其存在的理论价值和实践价值等深层次问题却探讨的不多。但亲告罪的系统研究无论对我们的刑法理论的完善还是刑事立法、刑事司法均能产生有益的影响,因此,本文试图在已有研究成果的基础上,从亲告罪存在的价值出发,对我国亲告罪的制度构建,进行系统的阐述,以期对理论和实践有所裨益。全文除导言和结语外,共分三部分,约49000字,其中脚注约8000字。 第一部分论述了亲告罪存在的价值。文章从价值及价值取向的基本理论为切入点,认为,首先,在秩序与自由之间,理性的刑法应当以尽可能少的刑事强制来维护社会秩序,而应尽可能多地保留公民的个人自由领域,国家权力不应过度介入社会主体的生活。规定亲告罪,由当事人自行处理纠纷,既不会损害社会的整体利益,同时又体现了对个人自由、个人自我选择的尊重。而且规定亲告罪,也适应了乡土社会的需求。其次,在公正与效率之间,国家所拥有的司法资源的稀缺性,要求对司法资源进行合理有效的配置,而理性经济人的假设决定了冲突<WP=4>主体不会愿意用较高的物质耗费通过诉讼的方式来赢得裁判上的相对较低的利益。设立亲告罪制度,一方面满足了国家司法资源的稀缺性要求,另一方面也满足了被害人对效率价值目标的追求,从而能以最少的人力、物力和财力,在最短的时间内最大程度地满足人们及社会对正义、自由、秩序的需求。第二部分详细阐述了亲告罪的适用范围。以行为的危害性和行为人的举证能力为界定标准,运用比较研究、实例研究等方法,就扩大我国亲告罪的适用范围,进行了理论上的分析。并以行为人与被害人之间的特定身份和行为造成的特定损害为标准,对亲告罪作了初步的分类。第三部分就亲告罪的诉讼程序问题作了一个初步的尝试。文章集中论述并建构了我国亲告罪制度中的亲告权人体系、亲告罪时效制度、首服制度及告诉撤回制度。更多还原

【Abstract】 Crime of private prosecution is one of categories in criminal legislation and is a basic form of crimes. Although criminal law circles of our country have made some studies on crimes of private prosecution for recent several decades, especially this kind of crimes was paid more attention after 1997 and many scholars wrote articles on this discussion, these efforts are too scattered and mostly focused on comparison and reference of these crimes with few discussion on systematic research on crimes of private prosecution, especially on some underlying issues such as its existent theoretical value and practical value. However, systematic study on crimes of private prosecution is not only helpful to improvement of our criminal law theory, but also to improvement of criminal legislation and judicial practices. For this reason, based on existing research fruits and from its existent value, this article tries to provide a systematic expatiation on designing our system of crimes of private prosecution to make a contribution to theory and practice.This article is divided into three parts excluding introduction and conclusion with 49,000 characters in total, including 8,000 characters of notes. The first part discusses its existent value of crimes of private prosecution. Taking <WP=6>the basic theory of value and value orientation as a cut-in point, this part holds that: Firstly, between order and freedom, a rational criminal law shall maintain social order with minimum criminal sanctions and reserve maximum private freedom for citizens. Power of state shall not be allowed to intervene into the life of social subjects. The provision of crimes of prosecution letting interested parties to settle down disputes by themselves will not impair the integral interests of society, but can display respects for private freedom and private choice at the same time. Additionally, the provision of crimes of private prosecution satisfies the demand of local society. Secondly, between justice and efficiency, the scarcity of judicial resources possessed by a country requires a reasonable and effective configuration of judicial resources, while the hypothesis of a rational economic man determines that subjects under conflicts do not expect exerting comparatively higher material costs with litigation to win back comparatively lower interests in a judgment. Establishing the system of private prosecution crimes not only can meet the demand of scarcity in a country’s judicial resources, but also can satisfies victims’pursuit of the value of efficiency. Therefore, it can satisfies citizens’and society’s demand for justice, freedom and order with minimum manpower, material resources and financial resources within a shortest term and at a highest extent.The second part provides a detailed discussion on application scope of crimes of prosecution. Based on harmfulness of an offence and evidence inducing capability of an offender as definition standards, with research methods of comparison and case study, this part makes a theoretical analysis on application scope of crimes of private prosecution in our country. Moreover, taking specific identity between offenders and victims and particular damages caused by offences as standards, it proposes a preliminary classification of crimes of private prosecution. <WP=7>The third part makes an initiative attempt on proceedings of private prosecution crimes. This part focuses on and sets up systems of persons with right of private prosecution, prescription, surrender and withdrawal of complaint under crimes of private prosecution in our country.更多还原