身份推定知情论之反思  

Reflection on the Doctrine of Identity-based Constructive Notice

作　　者：赖隹文 LAI Zhui-wen(China Commercial Law Co.Guangdong,Shenzhen 518048,China)

机构地区：[1]广东华商律师事务所,广东深圳518048

出　　处：《西南交通大学学报（社会科学版）》2020年第5期131-141,共11页Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University(Social Sciences)

摘　　要：身份推定知情论是机械法律适用的表现,导致本应个案独立进行的刑法评价由此交付给了行政前置法。以特定身份的查明替代知情状态的证明,拒绝对不知情的辩驳反证,又进一步把身份推定知情论异化为身份等同知情论,这既违反了刑事推定可反驳的共识,也消解了特定个罪的主观构成要件。刑法的责任主义原则难以容忍这种形式化理解,行政犯中的援引条款也无法引证主观要素与规范要素,援引条款只能为犯罪认定提供客观基础素材。跨法援引不等于照单全收,刑法与行政前置法之性质与初衷各异,由援引到接纳仍然存在距离,仍然需要刑法视域之目的考量与价值取舍。The doctrine of identity-based constructive notice is the embodiment of applying law mechanically,with the result of application of criminal law in accordance with administration prepositional law instead of individual case.Cases such as using specific identity ascertaining in substitution for knowing status proving,refusing the refuting and counterevidence of informed status,further making the doctrine of identity-based constructive notice equal to the doctrine that specific identity means knowing specific information;this violatesthe consensus that criminal presumption can be argued,and dispel the application of the four basic components of specific offense.The principle of convicting according to acts cannot stand this formalistic understanding.The invoking from administrative offence provides objective elements for conviction only,not subjective elements or regulation elements.Criminal law and administration prepositional law have different characters and original intention so the cross-law invoking is not equal to taking the theory completely.There exists distance between invoking and taking,thereby needingpurpose consideration and trade-off on criminal value.

关 键 词：身份推定 知情人员 内幕交易 行政犯 刑法原则 证券法 责任原则 刑法解释论 

分 类 号：D923.112[政治法律—民商法学] D922.29[政治法律—法学]