抽象危险犯的概念诠释与风险防控  

The Concept Interpretation for Abstract Dangerous Crime and Risk Control

作　　者：陈京春[1] 

机构地区：[1]西北政法大学刑事法学院,陕西西安710063

出　　处：《法律科学（西北政法大学学报）》2014年第3期116-126,共11页Science of Law：Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目(09CFX056)"刑事诉讼视野下的刑法建构"

摘　　要：风险刑法所关注的风险(危险)已经不局限于风险社会理论中的典型的现代性风险,抽象危险犯原本不是风险刑法的产物。抽象危险犯除了有法益保护前置化和积极的一般预防理论的支撑外,避免证明上的困难也是重要的、独立的理由。抽象危险犯的抽象危险可以是强制性推定的,但大多数是可以反驳的。抽象危险犯不同于行为犯、具体危险犯和行政犯,有独立存在的必要。对抽象危险犯的立法应当限制。对推定抽象危险的犯罪,司法认定需要进行两个层次的判断。对抽象危险推定的反驳并不意味着举证责任的转移。Risk criminal law do limit its concern on typical modern risk in the risk social theory. Abstract dangerous crime is not originally the product of risk criminal law. In addition to the theoretic support by the pre - positive protection of legal interests and actively general prevention theory, the important and independent reason is to avoid the proof difficulty. The abstract danger of abstract dangerous crime can be mandatory presumption, but most of it can be refuted. Abstract dan- gerous crime is different from behavior crime, specific dangerous crime and administrative crime. It is necessary for abstract dangerous crime to exist independently. The legislation for abstract dangerous crime should be limited. Judicial determination to presume abstract danger of a crime needs two levels of judgment. The refuting to the presumption of abstract danger does not mean the transfer of the burden of proof.

关 键 词：风险社会 法益 抽象危险犯 具体危险犯 行为犯 

分 类 号：DF611[政治法律—刑法学]