未遂犯处罚根据的实践展开

Practical Unfolding of the Punishment Basis for Attempted Offenders

在未遂犯处罚根据的问题上,存在着主观未遂论与客观未遂论的争论。其中主观未遂论是我国司法实践的主流立场,而客观未遂论是我国学界的有力观点,两者始终处于对立之中,对此显然有反思的必要。学理上对我国的司法判决提出了许多质疑意见,但都存在问题。其中客观危险说无法认定未遂犯中的具体危险,也不符合刑法的法益保护目的,而具体危险说则有滑向主观未遂论的“危险”。因此实践中的判决结论多数是合理的,只是其论证理由需要理论加以提升。就未遂犯的成立范围而言,以印象说为基础的重大无知标准具有合理性,就未遂犯的着手认定来说,优先判断主观构成要件,并将故意作为判定的重心具有必要性。上述观点总体符合司法实践的立场,同时又完善了其说理上的不足,是较为务实的处理方案。

On the basis of punishment for attempted offense,there is a debate between the subjective attempt theory and the objective attempt theory.The subjective attempt theory is the mainstream position in China’s judicial practice,while the objective attempted crime is a powerful point of view in China’s academic circles.The two are always in opposition,which is obviously necessary for rethinking.There are many questionings about China’s judicial decisions academically,but these reviews have some problems.Among them,the objective danger theory can not identify the specific danger in the attempted offense,nor does it accord with the legal interest protection purpose of criminal law,while the specific danger theory has the“danger”of sliding to the subjective theory on attempt.Therefore,most of the judgment in practice are reasonable,but the reasons for their arguments need to be improved theoretically.As far as the establishment scope of attempted crime is concerned,the standard of material ignorance based on the impression theory is reasonable.As for the determination of attempted crime,it is necessary to give priority to the subjective constituent elements and to take intention as the focus of judgment.The above views are generally in line with the position of judicial practice,and will improve its lack of reasoning.It is a more pragmatic treatment scheme.