民刑防卫限度一元论之再提倡--基于“行为导向的双层次判断模式”

Further Advocacy of the Monism Regarding Justifiable Defense Limit in Civil and Criminal Laws:Based on“Behavior-oriented Two-level Judgment Mode”

民刑两大部门法对防卫限度的差异化规定为民刑防卫限度一元论与二元论之争埋下伏笔。民刑防卫限度二元论以缓和违法一元论为基底,存在无法调和的理论缺陷。从法律条文的角度分析,民法与刑法关于防卫限度的立法表述虽然有所不同,但并不足以推出“基本相适应说”与“必需说”之对立,认为民刑防卫限度的判断标准各成一派的观点没有规范依据。与民刑防卫限度二元论相比,民刑防卫限度一元论更加契合正当防卫的正当根据与制度目的,具有显著优势。民法一元论的两条演绎路径均面临着无法回应的质疑,应当予以摒弃。刑法一元论立场下的“行为导向的双层次判断模式”采用行为限度与结果限度相区分的体系构造,并以“必需说”为理论内核,能够有效地纠正“唯结果论”的错误理念,顺应了正当防卫权不断扩张的立法趋势。

In terms of justifiable defense limit,the difference in provisions in the civil and criminal laws has laid the groundwork for disputes between monism and dualism regarding this limit in these two laws.The dualism regarding justifiable defense limit in civil and criminal laws is basically to ease monism regarding illegality,which itself has irreconcilable theoretical defects.From the perspective of the legal provisions,although the legal expression of these two laws on justifiable defense limit is different,it is insufficient to infer an opposition of“basic compatibility theory”against“necessity theory.”There is no normative basis for the viewpoint that judgment criteria for justifiable defense limit described in civil and criminal laws are different from each other.Compared with the dualism regarding justifiable defense limit in civil and criminal laws,the monism regarding justifiable defense limit in civil and criminal laws is more in line with the justness basis and system purpose of justifiable defense,which is significantly advantageous.Civil law monism faces unanswerable challenges in its two interpretative paths,so it should be discarded.The“behavior-oriented two-level judgment mode”under the position of criminal law monism adopts a system structure that distinguishes between behavioral limit and consequence limit,and takes“necessity theory”as the theoretical core,which can effectively correct the wrong concept of“consequentialism,”so as to conform to the legislative trend of continuous expansion of legitimate defense rights.