正当防卫与聚众斗殴罪问题的比较——以林某甲等人聚众斗殴案为例  

Clarifying Several Issues on the Crime of Affray and Justifiable Defense——A Case Study of Lin and Others’Affray

作　　者：杨帆 Yang Fan(School of Law,Central South University,Changsha 410000,China)

机构地区：[1]中南大学法学院,湖南长沙410000

出　　处：《黑河学院学报》2020年第11期32-35,62,共5页Journal of Heihe University

摘　　要：司法实践以及理论界认为聚众斗殴和正当防卫二者是相互排斥的关系,认为自招侵害、预期侵害情况下否定正当防卫的成立,并且认为在防卫的场合,防卫人主观上不能存在攻击意识。但正当防卫制度和聚众斗殴之间并不是对立关系,刑法中规定的正当防卫制度是一项授权性制度,公民可以根据法律赋予的防卫权同不法侵害做斗争。过于严苛的划分二者之间的界限不利于公民行使防卫权。司法实践的做法具有违反刑法规范、违反侵害紧迫性认定标准,以及强人所难的弊端,需克服上述弊端,肯定在自招侵害、预期侵害的场合仍然存在正当防卫的空间,淡化对防卫人防卫意识的认定,增强公民与违法犯罪行为做斗争的信心。Judicial practice and theoretical circles believe that the crime of affray and justifiable defense are mutually exclusive.They believe that the establishment of justifiable defense is denied under the circumstances of self-recruit infringement and expected infringement,and that in the case of defense,the defender should not have an attacking consciousness.However,the justifiable defense system is not an antagonistic with affray.The justifiable defense system stipulated in the criminal law is an authoritative system,and citizens can fight against illegal violations according to the defense rights granted by law.Too strict a distinction between the two is not conducive to the exercise of defense rights by citizens.There is a need to overcome the disadvantages in judicial practice,such as violating criminal law norms,violating the urgency determination standard of infringement,and imposition.There must be a space for justifiable defense on the occasion of self-recruit infringement and expected infringement;therefore,it is necessary to dilute the defense’s recognition of defense consciousness and to increase citizens’confidence in fighting against crimes.

关 键 词：正当防卫 聚众斗殴 自招侵害 预期侵害 防卫意识 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]