被胁迫行为的刑法定性——一个独立于紧急避险与胁从犯的概念  

The Nature of Coercive Act in Criminal Law

作　　者：邹宇[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学

出　　处：《福建法学》2017年第2期37-42,共6页

摘　　要：被胁迫行为一直是刑法学界与司法实务界备受争议和关注的问题。依照我国刑法,被胁迫行为在"紧急避险"与"胁从犯"中均有涉及。当发生被胁迫犯罪案件时,将其归入紧急避险,可阻却该行为的违法性;归入胁从犯,则行为违法有责。然而实务中却频频出现紧急避险与胁从犯所不能涵盖的被胁迫犯罪案件,此时若强行适用紧急避险或胁从犯理论,既不利于案件结果的公正,也有损我国刑法已经建构起的相对完善的概念体系。因此,有必要重新定义被胁迫行为,确立以期待可能性为核心的独立于紧急避险与胁从犯理论的被胁迫行为。Coercion has been a controversial issue in the field of criminal law andjudicial practice. According to the criminal law of our country, the act of coercion is involved in ＂emergency hedge＂ and ＂coerced accomplice＂. When a criminal case is co- erced, it will be classified as an emergency refuge and it can hinder the illegality of the act; if coerced into an accomplice, the act is illegal^and liable. However, in practice it is frequent in criminal cases which are not covered by the emergency hedge and coerced offender. If the emergency hedge or coerced offender is applicable to the cases, it is not conducive to the outcome of the case ofjustice, but also detrimental to the perfect system of concept in the criminal law of our country. Therefore, it is necessary to redefine the behavior of coercion, and to establish the coercion behavior which is independent of the theory ofemergancy hedging and coerced accomplice.

关 键 词：被胁迫行为 紧急避险 胁从犯 期待可能性 

分 类 号：D914[政治法律—刑法学]