【作者】 张莹；

【导师】 赵楚文；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 刑法学， 2020， 硕士

【摘要】 在共同犯罪中,行为人放弃自己的行为,并有效制止其他共犯人继续实施犯罪行为或者阻止犯罪行为有效避免危害结果出现,则将其作为犯罪中止予以认定一般并无争议。而现实生活中,却也存在着不少具有中止行为任意性,但并未有效阻止共犯或犯罪结果发生的情形。此时,基于一人既遂、全案既遂的共同犯罪归责原则,就将自动放弃犯罪的人完全排除犯罪中止和犯罪未遂的可能性,是否符合个人责任原则、是否符合预防犯罪的刑事政策、是否符合行为人只承担与自身行为有因果关系的引起法益侵害之责的因果共犯论和法益侵害说的基本立场?如何确定其行为处罚的适当性?毫无疑问,这是一个重要的刑法理论问题且值得深入研究。国外学者针对此种情形提出了共犯关系的脱离理论。结合我国司法实践中共同犯罪位于前列的几类取得型财产犯罪,本文拟将有关共犯脱离这一独特情形的相关理论及实践中的具体认定、处罚等问题作为研究对象,展开进一步的研究分析工作,旨在以我国现行共犯体系为基础,通过理论研究将共犯脱离的认定限制在合理的范围内,提出合适的处罚原则。本着刑法的谦抑性,以期能对我国刑法体系中未涉及的这一共犯未完成形态的认定提供解决方案。本文在研究过程中所采用的写作思路为提出问题——分析问题——解决问题。故而在这一思路的指导下,将文章主要分为三个部分展开论述。首先为导论,开篇便是对本次选题的研究目的与意义、国内外学者对共犯的脱离理论以及本文研究的方法与路线予以交代。第一部分根据我国生效的案例,引出实践中对共犯脱离情形处理存在的争议点,以此对我国共犯的脱离如何认定展开分析和探讨,并立足司法实践,有针对性的提出当前我国共犯的脱离认定存在偏差、处罚不一的问题。第二部分在明确我国共犯体系的基础上,对比与国外共犯体系的差异,阐述国外共犯脱离理论的争议,进行评析后,论证能否在我国适用及如何借鉴,并提出自己的观点。文章的最后一部分结合我国的司法实践,探讨适合我国立法和司法实践的共犯脱离理论标准、司法标准,并针对共同犯罪中位居前列的三类取得型财产犯罪,对共犯脱离的认定进行具体化分析,并提出合适的处罚原则,将其贯彻到实务中。更多还原

【Abstract】 There is generally no dispute that the perpetrator was found guilty of discontinuance of crime,if in the joint crime,he gives up his own behavior,and effectively stops other joint offenders from committing the crime or effectively prevents the occurrence of the result of the crime.However,in real life,there are many cases that have the arbitrariness of discontinuation which are not effectively prevent the accomplice or the result of crime.At this point,based on the doctrine of liability fixation of joint crime of one person’s accomplished crime and the whole case’s accomplished crime,It completely eliminates the possibility of criminal suspension and attempted crime for those who voluntarily renounce crime.whether it is in line with the principle of personal responsibility,whether it is compliance with the criminal policy of crime prevention,whether it is in line with the basic standpoint of the theory of causal accomplice and the theory of legal interest infringement that the perpetrator is only responsible for the fact that his act is causal.How to determine the appropriateness of punishment? There is no doubt that this is an important theoretical problem of criminal law and deserves further study,Foreign scholars put forward the theory of withdrawing from the complicity in such situation cases.Combined with several top three acquired property crime which appeared in the joint crime in the judicial practice of our country,this paper intends to carry out an extended study on the identification and punishment of the theory of accomplice’s departure,trying to limit the identification of accomplice’s departure within a reasonable range on the basis of clarifying the system of accomplice in China,and put forward appropriate punishment principles.In the light of the modesty and restraint of the criminal law,the author hopes to provide a solution to the identification of the unfinished form of the accomplice not involved in the criminal law system of our country.In the process of research,the writing idea of this paper is to raise questions,analyze problems and solve problems.Therefore,under the guidance of this idea,the article consists of three parts.First of all,it is the introduction,the beginning is to explain the purpose and meaning of the topic,the theory of withdrawing from the complicity by scholars at home and abroad,and the research methods and routes of this paper.In the first part,according to the effective cases in our country,the author introduces the existing disputes in dealing with the withdrawing from the complicity in practice,so as to analyze and discuss how to identify the withdrawing from the complicity in our country,and based on the judicial practice,puts forward the problems of deviation and different punishment in the current withdrawing from the complicityin our country.In the second part,on the basis of clarifying the accomplice system of our country,comparing with the difference of the accomplice system of foreign countries,the author expounds the dispute of the theory of the withdrawing from the complicity of foreign countries,and after the evaluation and analysis,demonstrates whether it can be applied in our country and how to draw lessons from it,and puts forward his own point of view.The last part of the article,combined with China’s judicial practice,discusses the theoretical and judicial standards of withdrawing from the complicity which are suitable for the legislation and judicial practice of our country,and specifically analyzes the identification of accomplice separation according to the three types of acquisitive property crimes which are in the forefront of the joint crimes,and puts forward the appropriate punishment principles,which will be implemented in the practice.更多还原