【作者】 许萍；

【导师】 白佳玉；

【作者基本信息】 中国海洋大学 ， 法律（专业学位）， 2014， 硕士

【摘要】 危险驾驶罪入罪之前,学术界和实务界曾对其应否入罪有过激烈的争论。我国《刑法修正案(八)》正式将危险驾驶罪纳入刑法的调整范畴之后,使这一争论得以平息。但危险驾驶罪在施行过程中也不可避免的出现了一些问题,为此最高人民法院于2014年年初出台了相应的司法解释,破除对了某些问题的争议,但是仍然未能解决实践中出现的对醉驾型危险驾驶罪缓刑适用方面的疑惑。实践中,对醉驾性危险驾驶罪应否适用缓刑以及应如何适用缓刑的问题仍具有有争议,同时出现了不同地区对相同或相似醉驾行为入罪后,在缓刑适用方面出现较大差异的现象。有不少人不赞成适用缓刑,或者说不应过早的强调缓刑适用。当然,出现这一争论的原因是多方面的,首先,对于新规定的罪名,实践中缺乏相应的经验,无法把握量刑的尺度,更无法判断是否适用缓刑。其次,来自社会舆论的影响,也给缓刑的适用戴上了一副枷锁。但无论从立法上还是刑事政策上来看,该罪适用缓刑是应有之意。通过考察国外及我国香港地区对危险驾驶罪的规定,可以看出,很多国家对醉驾行为都规定了较为严厉的刑事处罚,但这些国家或地区并未排除对醉驾行为缓刑的适用。所以“醉驾型”危险驾驶罪适用缓刑既符合立法本意也符合宽严相济的形势政策的要求。在明确了“醉驾型”危险驾驶罪可以适用缓刑时,就应当进一步讨论如何规范的适用缓刑,既能达到惩罚的目的,又能防止缓刑的滥用。首先应科学量刑,从被告人体内的酒精含量、是否造成危害后果以及被告人的认罪态度等方面准确量刑,再对符合适用缓刑条件的被告人适用缓刑,避免出现滥用缓刑的现象。另外,可以通过完善缓刑考察内容的方式来确保缓刑的适用能够达到预期的目的。更多还原

【Abstract】 Incrimination before the crime of dangerous driving, academics and practitioners should not have to incriminate them had a heated debate. Incrimination before the crime of dangerous driving, academics and practitioners should not have to incriminate them had a heated debate. After China’s "Criminal Law Amendment (eight)," the official crime of dangerous driving will be included to adjust the scope of the criminal law, so that this controversy subsided. But the crime of dangerous driving in the implementation process, inevitably there are some problems, for which the Supreme Court in early 2014 introduced the corresponding judicial interpretation, get rid of some of the controversial issues, but in practice there are still unresolved type of drunk driving dangerous driving probation terms doubts. In practice, no danger of drunk driving, driving offenses should be applied and how it should apply to probation problem still has contested, while the emergence of different regions of the same or similar acts of drunk driving after the crime, there a big difference in terms of probation phenomenon. There are a lot of people do not agree on probation, or that should not be premature to emphasize Probation. Of course, the reason for this debate is multifaceted, first of all, the new regulations for the offense in practice the lack of appropriate experience, unable to grasp the scale of sentencing, but was unable to determine whether the application of probation. Secondly, the influence from public opinion, but also to wear a pair of suitable probation shackles. But in terms of the legislation and criminal policy point of view, the offense probation is the proper meaning. By examining the provisions of foreign countries and China’s Hong Kong crime of dangerous driving, we can see that many countries have regulations on drunk driving behavior of a more severe criminal penalties, but did not exclude these countries or regions probation for drunk driving behavior apply. Therefore, the "drunk driving type" crime of dangerous driving probation is consistent with the legislative intent is also to meet the requirements of the situation of combining punishment with leniency policy. In the clear "drunk driving type" crime of dangerous driving probation when applicable, should be further discussion on how to regulate the application of probation, can achieve the purpose of punishment, but also to prevent abuse of probation. Should first scientific sentencing the defendant from the alcohol content in the body, whether harmful consequences as well as other aspects of the attitude of the defendant’s guilty plea and sentencing accurate, then the defendant comply with probation conditions for probation, to avoid the appearance of abuse of probation. In addition, you can examine the contents of probation perfect way to ensure the application of probation to achieve the intended purpose.更多还原