检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:刘国香
机构地区:[1]澳门科技大学,澳门
出 处:《争议解决》2023年第1期265-270,共6页Dispute Settlement
摘 要:相较于近年来得到重视的正当防卫制度,假想防卫过当并没有得到相应的关注。相反地,其立法上的空白与司法实践上的纷繁不一至今都是难以解决难题。这不仅有损司法权威,还极大地挫伤了公民对于防卫行为正当性的期待。故本文立足与假想防卫过当的核心与疑难点,着重分析假想防卫过当的罪过形式,即假想防卫过当是属于故意犯罪还是过失犯罪,又或者是意外事件。基于其与防卫过当罪过形式的差异,明确假想防卫过当的法定量刑困境,并尝试开辟一个新的思路。Com-pared with the system of justifiable defense which has been paid more attention in recent years, the hypothetical excessive defense has not received the corresponding attention. On the contrary, its legislative blank and judicial practice in the complexity are difficult to solve the problem. This not only damages the judicial authority, but also greatly dampens citizens’ expectation of the legitimacy of defense. Therefore, based on the core and difficult points of hypothetical excessive defense, this paper focuses on the analysis of the form of the crime of hypothetical excessive defense, that is, whether the hypothetical excessive defense belongs to intentional crime or negligent crime, or is an accident. Based on its difference with the form of the crime of excessive defense, this paper makes clear the legal sentencing dilemma of the hypothetical excessive defense, and opens up a new idea for the attempt.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.117