破坏生产经营罪“其他方法”的解释论展开

On the Explanation of"Other Methods"of the Crime of Disrupting Production and Operation

近年来,破坏生产经营罪被适用之频率愈来愈高且呈现出口袋罪的倾向。在网络发达、商业繁荣的今天,学者们多认为破坏生产经营罪的罪状已经不能满足于现实生活,因此以可罚之必要性为内核的实质解释论者将本罪的“其他方法”进行过度扩张,这使得本罪几乎可以包含一切对经济利益造成损害的行为。为了遏制其口袋罪之倾向,从具体案件出发,对司法适用现状进行考察,综述了形式解释立场和实质解释立场在解释“其他方法”时的各自观点,反思其利弊,并坚持形式解释之立场。最终提出应当在适用同类解释规则解释“其他方法”时对列举项的类型进行提炼,坚持先列举项后概括项、先形式后实质的解释思路,从而合理认定本罪的“其他方法”。

In recent years,the crime of disrupting production and business operation has been applied more and more frequently,showing the tendency of pocket crime.Today,with the development of the Internet and the prosperity of business,many scholars think that the crime of disrupting production and operation can no longer be satisfied with real life.Therefore,the substantive hermeneutics with the necessity of punishment as the core will overexpand the"other methods"of this crime,which makes this crime almost include all acts that cause damage to economic interests.In order to curb the tendency of pocket crime,this paper,starting from specific cases,investigates the current situation of judicial application,summarizes the respective views of formal interpretation and substantive interpretation in explaining"other methods",reflects on their advantages and disadvantages,and insists on the formal interpretation.Finally,it is proposed that the types of listed items should be refined when applying the same interpretation rules to explain"other methods",and the interpretation ideas of first listing items and then summarizing items,first form and then substance should be adhered to,so as to reasonably identify"other methods"of this crime.