证据法范畴下的犯罪构成研究

【作者】 王鹏；

【导师】 杜宇；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 法律， 2012， 硕士

【摘要】 犯罪构成理论是刑法中的重要课题,也是刑法学者一直关注的焦点问题,犯罪构成不单是形式性的概念规定,更是作为连接刑法和刑事诉讼法的纽带,它是刑事诉讼的参照物,引领着刑事诉讼的方向,刑事诉讼过程实际上就是运用证据判断犯罪嫌疑人或被告人的行为是否符合刑法规定犯罪构成的过程。这一点正如日本刑法学者小野清一郎指出的：“刑事程序一开始就以某种构成要件为指导形象去辨明案件并且就其实体逐步形成心证,最终以某种符合构成要件的事实达到确实的认定为目标”。1犯罪构成的这种诉讼功能体现在诉讼证明问题上,其不仅为刑事诉讼提供了区分证明对象的标准界限,对举证责任的分配以及各个对象的举证程度、范围提供了整体性指导,并且可发挥其应有的推定功能从而更有逻辑的将控辩双方提供的证据对应于犯罪构成体系的理论范围。本文即按照此路径展开思路,具体分析其相互关系,并由此对我国犯罪构成体系存在的问题展开重塑的理论构想,本文除去前言和结论外共分为三章。第一章首先阐述了犯罪构成概念的起源和概念形成,并具体介绍外国犯罪构成理论的基本分类,包括英美法系双层次犯罪构成体系、大陆法系递进式犯罪构成模式以及大陆法系平面型犯罪构成模式的各个构成要件,在进一步阐述我国犯罪构成理论由来及其特点的基础上,对各国犯罪构成体系进行分析比较。第二章是本文的重点,在分析犯罪构成与证据法基本关系的基础上,从证明对象、证明责任分配、犯罪构成体系的推定功能和被告人承担证明责任的边界四个方面具体阐述犯罪构成与证据法各个方面的勾连。首先,对证明对象进步初步分类即实体法事实和程序法事实。刑事案件中的实体形成是以某种特定的犯罪构成要件为指导形象进行的,定罪量刑实际上是一个根据案件事实适用实体法归责的过程,并不是依靠法官的自由裁量。如果该事实不能引起具体实体法规范的适用,与该事实相关的指控或辩解就不应成为案件的证明对象,即在实体事实的范畴内,证明对象都是围绕犯罪构成要件而形成。而程序法事实的证明标准更为复杂,根据程序正义原则构建的刑事诉讼程序中,程序事实与实体事实相伴相随,不可分离,所以程序事实本身必然成为证明对象。其次,证明责任分配问题涉及到证据的评判标准不同而不同的适用原则,其中的违法性要素和阻却性要素中由谁负责举证和属于什么犯罪构成体系中的哪一类构成要素,直接引起了对于犯罪构成体系如何合理构成的讨论。再次,推定功能是控辩双方所举证据欲证明的犯罪事实或抗辩理由与犯罪构成之间联系的重要纽带,法官可由双方举证与犯罪构成体系进行对应性联系,从而形成自由心证或由陪审团根据以上举证做出有罪或无罪的裁判。最后,被告人通常在无罪推定原则下不承担举证责任,但是对一些特殊情况则应该在不承担因未能提供证据而被有罪判决的不利情况下,进行有限性举证,从而达到合理性和经济性的刑事诉讼要求。第三章在阐述我国犯罪构成体系中缺乏推定功能和层次性的基础上,讨论如何对犯罪构成体系进行重塑。更多还原

【Abstract】 The theory of crime constitution which is a very important topic in the area of Criminal Law, is also the focus of attention of the criminal law scholars. It’s not only a form of the concept of regulation, but also as the connection of the criminal law and the criminal procedural law. It refers criminal litigation frame, and lead the direction of the criminal procedure. In fact, the criminal litigation process is the use of the criminal suspect or the defendant evidence of compliance with criminal law behavior of the crime of process. As the Japanese scholars of criminal law, small qing ichiro pointed out:"To a criminal procedure in some components for guiding image to identify the case and entity gradually formed proof, in a final accord with the facts of the elements to do, that is the goal" The crime of the litigation function embodied in judicial proof, not only for the criminal procedure provides distinguish the object of proof standard line, to the burden distribution, and each object degree, limits on the burden of proof provide integrity guidance, and can play their due to the function of presumption more logical will provide evidence of two sides are the necessary of the corresponding to the theory of a crime system of scope. This paper according to the thought that launches, specific analysis and their relationship, and thus the crime system of our country on the problems existing in the remodeling idea theory, this paper remove preface and conclusions were divided into three chapters.The first chapter expounded the concept of the crime of the origin and de-veloping, and introduces the basic theory of the classification of foreign crime, including double levels of Anglo-American law system of the crime, the progressive type mode of continental law system and the model plane type of the continental crime law system of the crime, it gives a further discussion that compares crime system in all countries, on the basis of analyzing the theory of Chinese criminal origins and characteristics.The second chapter is the focus of this article, includes the object of proo-f, the allocation of the burden of proof, the proving border of defendant could bare and the function of presumption in crime system.First, the objects of proving include substantive law facts and procedural law fact. The criminal case in the form of a particular entity of crime for guidance of image, conviction is actually a according to the case facts of substantive law applicable to blame process, and not rely on the judge’s discretion. If the facts can’t cause specific substantive law standard applicable, and the fact that the relevant charges or excuse you should not become the object of proof of the case, that in fact the entity within the scope, the object of proof is focus on crime and form. The standards of proof and procedural fact is more complex, according to the principle of the construction procedure justice in the criminal procedure, procedures and the physical fact that your company fact, inseparable, so the program will be the object of proof fact itself.Secondly, the burden of proof allocation problem involves judgment standard of evidence of different and not applicable principle, of which the illegality of the elements and resistance but factor which was responsible for the proof and the system of the crime of what belongs to what kind of elements. These directly cause the discussion how to constitute reasonable system of crime.Again, the function of presumption is an important link between criminal proof and crime constitution, which the judge judges guilty or innocent bases onFinally, under the principle of presumption, he defendant usually don’t bear the burden of proving, but for some special cases, it should be the burden for limitation by the defendant, so as to achieve the rationality and the economy of the criminal procedure requirements.In the third chapter, it expounds that China’s lack of a crime system of the function of presumption and gradation, and discusses how to constitute a system of crime surroundings.更多还原