破坏野生动物资源型犯罪“主观故意”的教义学认定  

The Dogmatic Identification of“Subjective Intent”in the Crime of Destroying Wildlife Resources

作　　者：刘卫 LIU Wei(School of Law,Hunan University,Changsha 410082,Hunan,China)

机构地区：[1]湖南大学法学院,湖南长沙410082

出　　处：《石河子大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2023年第5期59-67,共9页Journal of Shihezi University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“刑法规范二重性视阈下存疑有利被告人研究”(20FFXB071)。

摘　　要：司法实践将人工繁育种群纳入野生动物刑事保护范围,并通过“外行人平行评价公式”认定犯罪故意的做法,不当扩大了野生动物罪名的规制范围,存在类推归罪的嫌疑。在破坏野生动物资源型案件裁判中,法官要以刑法条文构成要件要素的文本含义为核心,兼顾规范保护目的对野生动物概念进行解释,将人工繁育、驯养的动物种群排除在外,同时采取涵摄推导的方式,以行为发生时一般人可以获得的事实和行为人可以特别获得的事实为判断资料,以“社会一般人”的标准进行衡量,重点考察行为人是否认识到野生动物要素的规范性含义,进而认定犯罪故意。Judicial practice brings artificial breeding population into the scope of wildlife criminal protection.And the improper practice of identifying criminal intent through the“layman parallel evaluation formula”has improperly expanded the regulatory scope of wildlife charges.Consequently,there is a suspicion of analogy and crime.In adjudicating wildlife resource destruction-type cases,judges should focus on the textual meaning of the constituent elements of the criminal law provisions,regulate the purpose of protection,explain the concept of wild animals,and exclude artificial breeding and domesticated animal.Judges should adopt a culminating approach,judge by the facts that are available to the general public at the time of the act and the facts that are particularly available to the perpetrator,measure by the standard of the“average person in society”,and focus on whether or not the perpetrators are aware of the normative significance of the element of wildlife in order to determine the intent to commit the offence.

关 键 词：野生动物 人工繁育 犯罪故意 主观明知 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]