寻衅滋事罪法益新解——以随意殴打型寻衅滋事为视角  

A New Interpretation of the Legal Interests of the Crime of Provocation

作　　者：江海洋 Jiang Haiyang

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院

出　　处：《法治社会》2021年第1期77-87,共11页Law-Based Society

摘　　要：寻衅滋事罪一直被学界定性为兜底型罪名,有着口袋罪之污名。寻衅滋事罪以往的法益界定不合理,无论是社会秩序法益说抑或是类型区分法益说都存在不足,应将本罪所保护法益界定为不特定社会成员安宁权。此种界定具有合理性,不特定社会成员安宁权具有权利基础;将法益界定为不特定社会成员安宁权可以涵括本罪四种行为类型;有利于刑事司法实务中更好区分罪与非罪、此罪与彼罪;有助于在网络时代提升本罪的适应性以及发挥本罪的限缩性功能,洗刷本罪口袋罪之污名。随意殴打型寻衅滋事的解释,应立足于本罪法益,忽视难有结果的流氓动机之争,以双向互置法判断行为是否符合“随意”性;殴打行为的对象不需限定为不特定对象;殴打的结果可以包括致人重伤、死亡,适用想象竞合原理处断即可。The crime of provocation has been characterized as a miscellaneous crime by the academic circle,which has the stigma of pocket crime.The previous definition of legal interests in the crime of provocation is unreasonable and both the theory of legal interests in social order and the theory of legal interests in the distinction of types are inadequate,so the legal interests in this crime should be defined as the right to tranquility of unspecified social members.This definition is reasonable,and the right to tranquility of unspecified social members has a right basis.Defining the right of tranquility of unspecified social members can include four types of behavior of this crime.It is helpful to distinguish crime and non-crime,this crime and that crime in criminal justice practice.It is helpful to improve the adaptability of this crime and give play to the limiting function of this crime in the Internet era,and wash away the stigma of this crime.The interpretation of random beatings should be based on the legal interests of this crime,ignore the disputes of the motive of the rogue,and judge whether the behavior conforms to“random”by two-way interposition method.The object of assault should not be defined as an unspecified object.The result of the beating may include serious injury or death to the person.

关 键 词：法益 不特定 安宁权 随意 殴打 

分 类 号：D924.36[政治法律—刑法学]