实质故意形式化检讨  

The Examination of Tendency of Treating the Substantive Intention as Formal Intention

作　　者：贾健[1] 李瑞杰[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学,重庆401120

出　　处：《湖南警察学院学报》2017年第5期52-62,共11页Journal of Hunan Police Academy

基　　金：2017年国家社会科学基金一般项目"西部农村留守儿童被害调查及防控问题研究"(17BSH085)

摘　　要：晚近十余年来,刑法学界出现了将我国刑法中的"单一实质故意"与德国、日本刑法中的"双重形式故意"等同化并用后者取代前者,即"实质故意形式化"的动向。但依据法治国原则,实行罪刑法定,司法机关必须接受立法机关的价值引领,刑法释义也必须以刑法规范为依据。这就决定了犯罪故意概念的界定必须以规范文本为依据,不能将我国刑法术语与德国、日本刑法术语相混淆。实质故意形式化的思想根源是认为四要件存在缺陷,有必要用阶层论的观念来解释我国刑法的相关概念和规定。但这违反了罪刑法定原则,又忽视了刑法中认定犯罪主观要素的逻辑。鉴于四要件理论也不能全面解说我国刑法典,三阶层理论与四要件理论同作为犯罪论体系,都不能代替刑法典规则作为认定犯罪根本依据的作用。For more than a decade,there is a tendency to treat＂the single of concept of substantive intention＂in Chinese criminal law as＂the dual formal intention＂in German and Japanese criminal laws, and many scholars use the latter to replace the former,which is＂the tendency of treating the substantive intention as formal intention＂,in the field of criminal law. But according to the principle of the rule of law—＂nullum crimen sine lege,nullum poena sine lege＂, the judiciary must let itself be leaded by the value of the legislature. And the interpretation of criminal law must also be based on criminal law norms,which determines its concept must be based on normative text,and we should not be confused about it with German and Japanese criminal law terminology. The ideological root of this trend incurred,is that there are defects in the four elements,it is necessary to use the concept of class theory to explain the relevant concepts and provisions of our criminal law. But this violates＂nullum crimen sine lege,nullum poena sine lege＂and ignores the logic of the subjective elements of criminal law. In view of the four elements cannot explain China＇s criminal code perfectly,and the three classes theory of crime and four elements of crime system both are the Criminal System,which cannot replace the criminal code as the basis for the determination of the role of crime.

关 键 词：刑法 形式故意 实质故意 实质故意形式化 

分 类 号：D914.1[政治法律—刑法学]