打击错误中具体符合说适用的合理性探讨

Discussion on the Rationality of the Application of Specific Conformity Theory in Combating Errors

关于具体的打击错误问题,主要存在具体符合说与法定符合说之间的争论,两学说各有优势与缺陷。在我国司法审判中,不乏典型的打击错误案件,其判决结果也颇具争议。两学说分歧的本质在于对故意以及主观归责标准的不同理解。法定符合说将反对动机错置为故意的基础,因而存在不当扩大故意犯罪成立范围以及违反责任主义的缺陷。而具体符合说恪守故意论和责任主义的要求,坚持结合行为人内心真实意图认定故意,其结论更加合理、更能够为社会一般观念所接受。因此,在处理具体的打击错误问题时,应提倡采用具体符合说。

Concerning the specific issue of combating errors,there is a notable controversy between the specific conformity theory and the statutory conformity theory,each having its own strengths and weaknesses.In the judicial practice of China,there are typical cases of combating errors that have led to controversial judgments.The essence of the disagreement between the two theories lies in the different interpretations of intent and subjective imputation standards.The statutory conformity theory bases its opposition to the motive error on intent,leading to the drawbacks of inappropriately expanding the scope of intentional crimes and violating the principles of culpability.In contrast,the specific conformity theory adheres to the requirements of intentionalism and culpability,insisting on combining the true inner intent of the actor to determine intent.Its conclusions are more reasonable and more acceptable to general societal norms.Therefore,in dealing with specific issues of combating errors,it is advocated to adopt the specific conformity theory.