正当防卫正当化根据的厘清——二元论的批判性重申  

On the Foundation of Self-defense——A Critical Clarification of Dualism

作　　者：刘颖恺 Liu Yingkai

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院

出　　处：《刑法论丛》2023年第1期112-161,共50页Criminal Law Review

摘　　要：正当化事由的一般根据与正当防卫的正当化根据是一般和特殊的关系,但正当防卫的正当化根据和正当防卫的成立条件是抽象与具体的不同问题。在正当化事由一般根据上呈现的“多元发散”现象为正当防卫根据上的多元论奠定了基础。优越利益原则并非正当化根据,而是解决利益冲突情况下的方法论,只应作为防卫限度要件的判断基准之一。个人主义一元论具有逻辑一致性,但与我国实定法存在冲突,不法侵害人的“可归责性”只能作为有限放宽防卫限度的解释原理。我国正当防卫制度根据在于结合个人权利保护与法秩序维护的二元论,然而应当实现从侧重秩序维护向侧重权利保护的内部转变。法秩序维护说的核心在于行为规范的实效确证,而非整体法秩序的效力维护或预防效果的发挥。通过二元论内部两侧面的动态调整,可以为正当防卫要件的设定提供合理的解释结论。The foundation of justification,foundation of self-defense,and elements of self-defense are different questions.Dualism on the foundation of self-defense is determined by pluralism on the foundation of justification.The principle of superior interests is not a foundation,but a methodology for resolving conflicts of interest and one of the criteria of judging self-defense extent.Individualism on foundation of self-defense has its logical consistency,but conflicts with Chinesecriminal law.The“attributability”of the attacker could only explain the extent of self.defense,but not a justification.The foundation of self-defense in Chinese criminal law is dualism which combines personal-rights-protection and legal-order-maintenance.However,an internal transformation from focusing on legal-order-maintenance to personal-rights-protection should be accepted.The maintenance of legal-order is to confirm the actual effect of behavior norms,rather than maintenance of the overall legal-order or prevention effect.A reasonable explanation conclusion for setting self-defense elements can be provided by adjusting two factors of dualism.

关 键 词：正当防卫根据 优越利益 个人权利保护 客观归责 法秩序维护 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]