检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:蔡英[1]
出 处:《西南大学学报(社会科学版)》2007年第4期109-113,共5页Journal of Southwest University(Social Sciences Edition)
摘 要:想象竞合犯通常被认为是形式上的数罪、实质上的一罪,也有学者认为其是形式上的数罪、科刑上的一罪,尽管存有差异,但两者都主张对想象竞合犯应当从一重罪处断。但是,仔细分析这两种观点,可以发现它们是概念不清、逻辑矛盾的产物,都存在混淆概念、肢解犯罪构成或者是逻辑前后矛盾的问题。事实上,想象竞合犯并非形式上的数罪,而是实质上的数罪;对它的处断原则也不宜按照传统"从一重处".而应该数罪并罚。Imaginative joinder of offenders is usually regarded as several crimes in form but only one crime in substance in mainstream theory. Some scholars consider it to be several crimes in form and one crime in sentence. Despite the difference between them, the two opinions agree that imaginative joinder of offenders should be inflicted punishment with one heavier crime. However, if we analyze this two points carefully, we can find that they are results of unclear conception and inconsistent logic. Both of them have problems in garbling concept, dividing composition of crime or incompatible logic. In fact, imaginative joinder of offenders is not several crimes in form but several crimes in substance. Its principle of sentence is unfavorable to be inflicted punishment with one heavier crime as tradition but should be concurrent punishment for several crimes.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.7