互殴中的正当防卫研究

【作者】 朱鹏；

【导师】 曾凡燕； 薛剑祥；

【作者基本信息】 扬州大学 ， 法律硕士（法学）（专业学位）， 2018， 硕士

【摘要】 正当防卫(又称自我防卫,简称自卫),是大陆法系在刑法上的一种概念。指的是为了使得国家的、公共的利益、本人的或者他人的人身以及财产和其他权利免于受到正在进行的不法侵害,从而采取的一个制止不法侵害的行为,对不法侵害人造成损害的,这是属于正当防卫,不需要负刑事责任。”正当防卫明显超过必要限度造成重大损害的,应当负刑事责任,但是应当减轻或者免除处罚。那么正当防卫,其作为一项权利,在斗殴中是否可以成立呢,还是完全排除其成立的可能性。笔者认为,就现实中具体的斗殴的情况而言,本身表现形态就是多种多样的,不能概而论之,仅仅因为斗殴的存在就否认正当防卫成立的可能性,是不符合法理和情理的。从学界上来讲,对于斗殴当中存在正当防卫的标准,主要是持有的一种主客观混合的标准,实际上不止要考虑到正当防卫起因的合法性,还要考虑正当防卫的客观防卫程度要件和主观防卫意图是否相符合。除此之外,更为深入需要探讨的问题是,这些判断标准它们的具体内涵是什么,它们的相互关系以及判断层次应当是如何衔接和划分的,各方应用的标准是否都是正确的以及行为无价值和结果无价值之间的争论。本文除了结论部分外,主要分为三个部分。第一部分首先就本文的选题背景做了一次阐明,又对互殴与正当防卫的成立条件与关系作了简要阐释。文章第二部分主要通过实践案例具体分析了互殴中的正当防卫条件,包括互殴中正当防卫的起因条件、防卫意识、防卫时间、防卫限度等,又着重讲述了其与一般的正当防卫成立条件的不同。文章的第三部分分析了司法实践中存在的一些斗殴中正当防卫情形以及司法中对这些斗殴能否成立正当防卫的具体判断。互殴,也可以称为互相斗殴。斗殴一词本就是我国古代刑法中的一个罪名。根据《唐律疏议》的规定,相争为斗,相击为殴。故此,也可以看出斗殴本身就是一种为法律所禁止的犯罪行为。然而,在互殴之中,是否能成立正当防卫却是一个最重要的问题。笔者考量大量司法案例,发现在关于正当防卫定性问题上的争议上,多数是与互殴有关。因此,正确地认定互殴中的正当防卫就成为正当防卫认定中的一个重要问题。互殴的核心是互相斗殴,尽管斗殴是互相的,但依旧还是存在着谁先动手与谁后动手的区分。先动手的一方具有对他方的人身侵害性,属于不法的侵害行为,后动手的一方是对他方不法侵害行为的防御行为,属于反击行为。在一般情况下,反击行为构成正当防卫。那么,为什么在互殴的情况下,不能把后动手的一方的反击行为认定为正当防卫呢?所谓正当防卫,正当二字,表明须得反击行为具有正当性,才能被称为正当防卫。何为反击行为具有“正当性”,笔者认为,从一个宏观上来讲,就是指防卫行为完全符合正当防卫的要件,符合正当防卫主客观要件的有机统一。何为主客观要件的有机统一,就是防卫效果和防卫意图的有机统一。那么斗殴中要想存在正当防卫,反击行为也就需得具备正当性。从微观上讲,正当防卫的正当性,是“正”与“当”,是“质”与“量”的有机统一。“正”表明防卫行为的“质”,它反映的是防卫行为的性质,是人们在情急之下的本能反应,它符合一般的道德伦理。笔者认为,因互殴的起因往往是基于民事的纠纷而产生,故而互殴的起因不应该成为刑法上对正当防卫定性的条件。尽管在现实的案例考查中,笔者经常发现,司法者会因为互殴的起因问题而简单的排除正当防卫的存在。笔者认为,即使被防卫者本身对互殴起因有过错甚至是直接引起了互殴,但在认定正当防卫能否成立时,应当以防卫人和侵害人当时的行为状态为依据,互殴起因不应当成为认定条件。此外,互殴行为在实践中的表现往往十分复杂,在认定互殴中正当防卫时,要准确把握正当防卫的基本原则,并根据案件的具体情况,包括案件发生的具体的时间、环境、地点、双方力量对比、侵害强度、是否有器械、智力状况、不法侵害和防卫手段等因素,全面、综合地考察分析,才能作出准确的判断。更多还原

【Abstract】 Self-defense(also known as self-defense,referred to as self-defense)is a concept of the civil law system in criminal law.Means an act to put an end to an act that causes harm to the wrongdoer in order to protect the interests of the State,the public,one’s own or another person,property and other rights from an ongoing unlawful infringement,This is self-defense and it is not subject to criminal responsibility."If justifiable defense obviously exceeds the necessary limit and causes major damage,it shall bear criminal responsibility,but it shall be reduced or exempted from punishment.So legitimate defense,as a right,whether it can be established in the fight,or completely rule out the possibility of its establishment.The author thinks,as far as the concrete fight situation in reality is concerned,its own expression form is diverse,can not generalize,because the existence of the fight denies the possibility of the establishment of self-defense,is not in line with the legal theory and the reasonable.Academically speaking,when it comes to fighting.In addition to the conclusion,this paper is mainly divided into three parts.The first part first makes a clarification on the background of this topic,and also makes a brief explanation of the establishment conditions and relationship between mutual assault and self-defense.The second part of the article mainly analyzes the legitimate defense conditions in the mutual combat through practical cases,including the cause conditions,defense consciousness,defense time,defense limits,etc.in the mutual combat,and emphasizes the differences between it and the general conditions for the establishment of self-defense.The third part of the article analyzes the existence of some cases of legitimate defense in the fight in judicial practice and the judicial whether these fights can be established in the specific judgment.Mutual fights can also be called mutual fights.The word "fight" is a crime in the ancient criminal law of our country.According to the provisions of the "Law of the Tang Dynasty",they fight for each other and fight for each other.Therefore,it can also be seen that the fight itself is a crime prohibited by the law.However,whether legitimate defense can be established in mutual fights is the most important issue.The author considers a large number of judicial cases and finds that most of the disputes about the quality of self-defense are related to mutual fights.Therefore,it has become an important issue in the determination of legitimate defense to correctly identify the legitimate defense in the mutual assault.The core of the mutual fighting is mutual fighting.Although the fighting is mutual,there is still a distinction between who started the fight and who started it.The first party to do so has personal aggression against the other party and is an illegal infringement.The next party to do so is a defensive act against the illegal infringement of the other party and belongs to a counterattack.Under normal circumstances,the act of counterattack constitutes self-defense.The so-called self-defense,the right word,shows that it is necessary to have a counterattack behavior to have legitimacy,in order to be called self-defense.Why the Counterattack Behavior Is"Legitimacy",from a macro point of view,it means that the defense behavior fully conforms to the requirements of self-defense,in line with the organic unity of the subjective and objective elements of self-defense.What is the organic unity of the main objective elements is the organic unity of defense effect and defense intention.So fighting in the existence of legitimate defense,counter-attack behavior also needs to have legitimacy.From the microscopic point of view,the legitimacy of self-defense is "positive" and "when",and it is the organic unity of "quality" and"quantity"."Positive" indicates the "quality" of defensive behavior.It reflects the nature of defensive behavior and is an instinctive response to people’s urgency.It conforms to general morality and ethics.The author believes that because the cause of mutual assault is often based on civil disputes,the cause of mutual assault should not be a condition for the characterization of self-defense in criminal law.Although in the actual case examination,the author often found that the judicial person will simply rule out the existence of self-defense because of the cause of the mutual fighting.The author believes that even if the defenders themselves have fault with each other or even directly caused each other to fight,when determining whether legitimate defense can be established,it should be based on the behavior status of the defender and the attacker at that time,and the mutual fight should not be the result.Become a condition for determination.In addition,the performance of mutual assault in practice is often very complex.When determining legitimate defense in mutual assault,we must accurately grasp the basic principles of legitimate defense,and according to the specific circumstances of the case,Including the specific time of the case,the environment,the location,the strength of the two sides,the intensity of the infringement,the availability of equipment,intellectual status,unlawful infringement and the means of defense,etc.,a comprehensive and comprehensive examination.更多还原