妨害传染病防治罪之“严重危险”的认定  

Identification of"Serious Danger"for the Crime of Hindering the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases

作　　者：吴超莹 周凌[2] Wu Chaoying;Zhou Ling

机构地区：[1]北京师范大学法学院 [2]中南财经政法大学刑事司法学院

出　　处：《医学与法学》2022年第6期43-50,95,共9页Medicine and Jurisprudence

摘　　要：对于妨害传染病防治罪中的“严重危险”,司法实践中在判断时点的选择、危险之有无和危险紧迫性程度的判断诸端均面临困境。学界通说认为“严重危险”应当达到“具体危险”的程度。而根据“具体危险说”,可选择事前作为危险判断时点;“综合判断说”认为应当综合案件事实来判断危险是否存在;基于“偶然性说”的“三阶段判断说”则主张通过判断阻碍实害结果发生的因素是否具有可信赖性来认定危险的紧迫性程度。根据这些理论,事前判断立场可修正“危险判断时点”的选择;危险引起因素用以修正“危险之有无”的判断;危险影响因素和阻碍因素的可信赖性可用于修正“危险紧迫性”之判断。As for the"serious danger"in the crime of hindering the prevention and treatment of infectious dis⁃eases,the judicial practice faces difficulties in the choice of time,the presence or absence of danger and the degree of urgency of danger.The academic consensus is that"serious danger"should reach the level of"specific danger".According to the"concrete danger theory",pre-event can be chosen as the risk judging point.“The theory of compre⁃hensive judgment”holds that the existence of danger should be determined by combining the facts of a case.And"three-stage judgment theory"based on the"contingency theory"advocates to determine the urgency of danger by judging whether the factors that hinder the occurrence of actual harm result are reliable.According to these theories,pre-event judgment position can modify the choice of"risk judgment point";risk causing factors are used to modify the judgment of the presence or absence of danger;and the reliability of risk factors and impediments can be used to modify the judgment of"danger urgency".

关 键 词：妨害传染病防治罪 危险判断时点 危险之有无 危险紧迫性 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]