类型事实区分视角下行刑交叉案件刑事违法性的判断  

Judgment of Criminal Illegality in Cross Execution Cases from the Perspective of Distinguishing Type Facts

作　　者：陈禹橦 Chen Yutong

机构地区：[1]北京市人民检察院第四检察部

出　　处：《政法论坛》2024年第5期115-126,共12页Tribune of Political Science and Law

摘　　要：刑事违法性独立判断的核心要求,是以实质的法益概念指导犯罪构成要件、违法阻却事由的解释。传统行政犯的理论进路与我国刑事立法司法国情存在“水土不服”,无法解决我国行刑交叉类型事实中存在的刑事违法性判断问题,应当在重新划定行刑交叉事实类型的基础上探讨。立足我国统一刑法典的立法模式以及“刑事立法既定性又定量”等特征,应当区分二元处罚、违反行政前置法和瑕疵行政行为三种不同的行刑交叉类型事实,以个罪保护法益为指导,在构成要件范畴进行实质性解释,为准确认定刑事违法性,提出差异化判断路径。The core requirement of independent judgment of criminal illegality is to use the concept of substantive legal interest to guide the interpretation of the elements of crime and the causes of obstruction of violation.The theoretical approach of traditional administrative offenses is not in line with the national conditions of criminal legislation and justice in China,and cannot solve the problem of criminal illegality judgment in the administrative and criminal intersection facts in China.It should be explored on the basis of redefining the administrative and criminal intersection facts.Based on the legislative mode of criminal unification in China and the characteristics of“both qualitative and quantitative criminal legislation”,it is necessary to distinguish facts of three different types of administrative and criminal intersection,namely,dual punishment,violation of administrative pre-law and defective administrative behaviors,take the protection of legal interests of individual crimes as the guidance,provide substantive explanations within the scope of constitutive elements,and propose differentiated judgment paths to accurately determine criminal illegality.

关 键 词：行刑交叉 刑事违法性 二元处罚 空白刑法规范 瑕疵行政行为 

分 类 号：D922.1[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学] D924.3[政治法律—法学]