【作者】 张宇；

【导师】 吴振兴；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 刑法学， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 共同犯罪造成了加重结果,这是较常见的一种犯罪形态,而对于共犯者对刑法所规定的加重结果责任应当如何承担,在各国刑事立法中几乎都没有相应的规定,在审判中也不存在固定的法则,处理的随意性引发了颇多的争论。在本文中,笔者致力于在理论中寻求根据,对共同犯罪中的加重结果责任进行深入分析,以期提出一种可操作性强,又能和谐融入共同犯罪及结果加重犯理论体系的定罪量刑观。据此,文中首先对共同犯罪及结果加重犯的性质特征进行了论述,提出了结果加重犯的危险性本质决定了共同犯罪人应共同承担加重结果责任,而各共同犯罪人作为拟制的共同意思主体,应依从属性原则定罪,依独立性原则量刑。此后通过对罪过形式及因果关系的分析进一步论证了定罪的根据及其合理性。最后依靠司法裁量的原则来决定最终的刑罚。更多还原

【Abstract】 In judicial practice, joint crimes often occur. But in the implementation process, one or more peoples’acts directly caused more serious consequences, and then the criminal law prescribes a statutory punishment, which is a heavier sentence than the basic crime. In such circumstances, as far as the criminals who conduct the serious consequences are concerned, they naturally the aggregate consequential offence, and shoulder the aggregated consequential liability. But for other people who are the accomplices, how to define their responsibilities? The author attempts to explore the aggregated consequential liability in the joint crime, with reference to the traditional way of researching on the criminal patterns, expecting to give a clear conceptual framework, and solve problems in practice.This paper is divided into four parts to discuss the central problem except for the foreword and conclusion:The first part is devoted to solving the basic problems of aggregated consequential liability in the joint crime, prescribing and describing it from both theory and practice, and illustrates the significance of the study. In the first place, through the discussion on one case, showing those in face of such cases, judges can only use the basic academic analysis or their personal evaluations to evaluate and estimate for the lack of legal prescriptions. Different judges often have opposite verdicts to similar cases, which seriously damage the judicial practice. Then, it stipulates the problems that aggregated consequential liability is intended to solve in joint crime, studying the following specific ideas.更多还原