抽象危险犯反证的理论证成  

The Theoretical Justification of the Refutation of Abstract Endangerment Offenses

作　　者：徐彬喆 XU Binzhe(Law School,Peking University,Beijing 100871,China)

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院,北京100871

出　　处：《现代法学》2024年第5期147-161,共15页Modern Law Science

摘　　要：在抽象危险犯立法日益增多的刑法活性化时代,研究抽象危险犯能否反证具有重要意义。抽象危险犯是结果犯,且实施构成要件行为仅推定产生抽象危险结果。除一般产生危险的情形外,存在例外无危险的情形,此时应当允许反证出罪以合理限制处罚范围。反证既不违反疑罪从无原则,也不会将抽象危险犯异化为具体危险犯。所有抽象危险犯在理论上均允许反证。反证时,应当以行为人人身特性之外的客观情况为素材,在行为时以社会一般人标准考察是否存在抽象危险。此外,“但书”条款并非反证的适用依据。In an era of criminal law activation where the legislation of abstract endangerment offenses is increasing,studying whether abstract endangerment offenses can be refuted is of great significance.Abstract endangerment offenses are result offenses,and the implementation of the constituent elements of the act only presumes the production of abstract dangerous results.In addition to the general situation of danger,there are exceptional situations where there is no danger.At this time,it should be allowed to refute the crime to reasonably limit the scope of punishment.Refutation does not violate the presumption of innocence,and will not alienate abstract endangerment offenses into specific endangerment offenses.All abstract endangerment offenses theoretically allow refutation.When refuting,objective conditions other than the personal characteristics of the actor should be used as materials,and whether there is abstract danger should be examined at the time of the act according to the standard of the general person in society.Furthermore,the proviso clause does not serve as a basis for the application of refutation.

关 键 词：抽象危险犯 反证 推定 疑罪从无 

分 类 号：DF622[政治法律—刑法学]