论“交通肇事后逃逸”的限制性认定  

On the Restrictive Identification of Escaping after Causing Traffic Trouble

作　　者：姜天琦 Jiang Tianqi

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学

出　　处：《青少年犯罪问题》2021年第6期77-88,共12页Issues on Juvenile Crimes and Delinquency

摘　　要：对于交通肇事后逃逸情节的认定,司法实践观点不一,学理上也存在分歧。刑法对逃逸的加重处罚可谓是社会现实倒逼的产物,是一种被动之举,其根据存在争议。如果以尊重立法原意为导向解读加重处罚的目的,所能认定为肇事后逃逸的情形虽然是最广的,但是却与体系性逻辑相冲突,而且尚存违宪之嫌。因此,在考虑刑法基础立场以及教义学逻辑的前提下,有必要限制肇事后逃逸的认定。在保护法益的制约下加重处罚逃逸行为主要是为了避免被害人的生命健康法益的侵害危险升高,确保民事和刑事责任承担并非刑法的目的。已经救助了伤者或者没有可救助的伤者的情形下的逃逸,不具有加重处罚的正当性根据,不应被认定为交通肇事后逃逸。虽然逃逸的本质是不履行救助义务的不作为,但是刑法为其规定了具体的行为方式,并非任何不救助情形都能归于逃逸行为。在概念思维的限制下,不具有"逃逸"行为特征的见危不救不应属于交通肇事后逃逸的情形,但是可以将其认定为"其他恶劣情节"。As for the determination of the plot of escape after traffic accident, judicial practice presents a chaotic situation, and there are also differences in academic theory. The aggravating punishment of escape in criminal law is the product of social reality, which is a passive act, and its basis is controversial. If we interpret the purpose of aggravating punishment with respect to the original intention of legislation, we can find that although the situation of escape after causing an accident is the most extensive, it conflicts with the systematic logic and is still suspected of unconstitutional. Therefore, on the premise of considering the basic position of criminal law and dogmatic logic, it is necessary to limit the identification of hit and run. Under the restriction of the protection of legal interests, it should be considered that the main purpose of aggravating the punishment of escape behavior is to avoid the risk of infringement of the victim’s life and health legal interests, and to ensure that civil and criminal responsibility is not the purpose of criminal law. Therefore, if the injured have been rescued or there is no salvable injured, the escape does not have the legitimacy of aggravating the punishment and should not be regarded as the escape after traffic accident. Although the essence of escape is the omission of not performing the duty of rescue, the criminal law stipulates the specific behavior for it, and not all cases of non rescue can be attributed to escape behavior. Under the limitation of conceptual thinking, not having the characteristics of “escape” behavior should not belong to the situation of escape after traffic accident, but it can be identified as “other bad circumstances”.

关 键 词：肇事后逃逸 交通肇事 加重处罚 规范目的 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]