基于刑法修正案罚金刑适用的实证分析  

An Empirical Analysis of the Application of Fine Penalty Based on Criminal Law Amendment

作　　者：马琳娜 张明新 Ma Linna;Zhang Mingxin

机构地区：[1]南京师范大学法学院,南京210023 [2]江苏师范大学法学院,江苏徐州221116 [3]中国政法大学法律史学研究院

出　　处：《南京社会科学》2020年第2期95-100,共6页Nanjing Journal of Social Sciences

摘　　要：我国《刑法修正案(九)》对刑法分则的罪名新增了大量的罚金刑,确认了罚金刑在刑罚体系中的重要地位,并规定了罚金刑的延期缴纳制度,但其没有规定具体的执行机关,也没有规定执行时效,可操作性不强,并不能从根本上解决罚金刑执行难的问题。另外,其主要规定于故意犯罪中,而在过失犯罪中鲜有涉及,不符合宽严相济刑事政策的要求,且多数规定有罚金刑的罪名没有规定限额,对判处罚金刑的单位犯罪中没有任何数额的规定,赋予了法官过大的裁量权,不利于实体公正的实现。而德国、日本等国家在罚金刑的适用上相对成熟,将"刑罚与其严厉不如缓和"的刑法格言落到实处。我国可以借鉴域外罚金刑的相关制度,并结合我国实际情况,继续完善罚金刑,保持刑罚体系的一致性。China’s Criminal Law Amendment(9) has added a large number of fine penalty to the offenses of the criminal law. It has confirmed the important position of the fine penalty in the penalty system and stipulated the deferred payment system of the fine penalty. The specific enforcement agencies, there is no provision for the implementation of limitation, maneuverability is not strong, and can not fundamentally solve the problem of the implementation of fine penalty;In addition, its main provisions in the intentional crime, but rarely in the negligence crime involved, which is not in conformity with the requirements of the criminal policy of temper justice with mercy in the world;and most of the provisions of the criminal penalty does not stipulate the limit, the sentencing unit of the fine does not have any amount of the provisions of the law, given the judge excessive discretion is not conducive to the entity fair achieve. In Germany, Japan and other countries in the application of fine penalty has been relatively mature, the "penalty is not as severe as mitigation" criminal maxims to put into the pratice. China should learn from the relevant foreign penalties system, combined with China’s social reality, continue to improve the fine penalty, to maintain the consistency of the penal system.

关 键 词：罚金刑 刑罚轻缓化 商业保释金 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]