供犯罪所用本人财物没收法律性质的规范界定  

The normative definition of the legal nature of confiscation of personal property used for crime

作　　者：季姗姗 JI Shan-shan(Shanghai Pudong New Area People’s Court,Shanghai,200120,China)

机构地区：[1]上海市浦东新区人民法院,上海200120

出　　处：《闽西职业技术学院学报》2025年第1期16-19,43,共5页Journal of Minxi Vocational and Technical College

基　　金：2022年度湖南省研究生科研创新项目“企业犯罪特别没收制度优化研究(课题编号:CX20220442)”。

摘　　要：供犯罪所用本人财物条款立法明确性、精细化层面存在不足。刑罚说在惩罚属性、个案裁量、比较法层面存在合理之处,但是惩罚属性并不代表其为刑罚,个案裁量并不绝对影响法律性质、难以克服责任原则之阻碍。独立处分措施基于保安处分措施不足而提出,但是立定前提基于对物保安处分的错误认识,忽视对物保安处分措施之存在,并不具有合理性。供犯罪所用本人财物没收的法律性质,应当定位于对物保安处分,可以有效实现特殊预防。立足本土文化环境,供犯罪所用本人财物并不存在之时,不应予以没收替代价额,其预防功效更多是基于特定犯罪工具的特殊预防。The legislative clarity and refinement of the provisions of personal property used in crime are insufficient.The theory of penalty is reasonable in the aspects of penalty attribute,case discretion and comparative law,but its penalty attribute does not mean that it is a penalty,case discretion does not absolutely affect the nature of law,and it is difficult to overcome the hinders of the principle of liability.The independent measures are put forward based on insufficient security measures,but its premise is based on the wrong understanding of security measures,ignoring the existence of physical security measures,which is not reasonable.The legal nature of the confiscation of personal property used for crime should be located in the punishment of property security,which can effectively achieve special prevention.Based on the local cultural environment,when the personal property used for crime does not exist,it should not be confiscated as an alternative price for reference to foreign practices,and its preventive effect is more based on the special prevention of specific criminal tools.

关 键 词：供犯罪所用本人财物 刑罚说 独立处分说 对物保安处分说 特殊预防 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]