于欢案之反思——正当防卫中的不法侵害

Reflections on the Yu Huan Case——Illegal Infringement in Justifiable Defense

由于我国的刑法理论中没有普遍接受"防御性紧急避险"的概念,否定对危险源本身的反击成立正当防卫就意味着构成犯罪。因此,对正当防卫中"不法侵害"的划定具有重要意义。现有理论中,对于"不法侵害"的界定借助刑法以外的不法概念,缺少与犯罪构成的对接。完整的"不法侵害"等同于犯罪的概念,但是,考虑到对无责任能力者也应当肯定防卫权,可以将责任能力等责任阻却事由从"不法侵害"的限制调价中消除。为了达到体系的协调,不具有罪过的侵害也应当纳入"不法侵害"的范畴,从而肯定"对物防卫"理论。再进一步,不符合构成要件与符合违法阻却事由的事件也可能成立防卫的对象。对于"不法侵害"的理解,应当采用类型化的思维。

Since there is no universal acceptance of the concept of “defensive emergency avoidance” in China’scriminal law theory, it is a crime to negate the counterattack of the danger source itself and establish a justdefense. Therefore, the delineation of “illegal infringement” in justifiable defense is of great significance. In theexisting theory, the definition of “illegal infringement” is based on the concept of unlawfulness beyond criminallaw, and lacks connection with the constitution of crime. The complete “illegal infringement” is equivalent to theconcept of crime. However, taking into account that defense rights should also be affirmed for those who areincapacitated, responsibility impediment reasons, such as responsibility ability, can be removed from therestriction conditions of “illegal infringement”. In order to achieve the coordination of the system, harmlessinfringements should also be included in the category of “illegal infringement” so as to affirm the theory of“defense of object”. Furthermore, incidents that do not conform to the constitution elements and incidents thatfollow the law may also form the object of defense. For the understanding of “illegal infringement”, type-orientedthinking should be adopted.