想象竞合与法条竞合的界分与反思——以“三段论”为视角的分析

Rethinking on the Distinctions between Ideal Concurrence and Regulatory Concurrence——From the Perspective of Legal Syllogism

在法学三段论法运用的维度中,法条竞合与想象竞合的处断有着不同的进路。想象竞合以一行为无法被单一刑法规范完整评价为基础,因而需要多次适用三段论在数结论之间进行优选;法条竞合则以规范之间的交错重合关系为前提,因而根据彼此间的逻辑关系在大前提之间予以优选即可。不同的刑法理论选择构建了不同的犯罪构成、行为与刑罚理论,不同刑法理论对想象竞合与法条竞合的界分也有着明显差异,在具体探讨时需要从上述的基础要素出发区分想象竞合与法条竞合。

In the perspective of legal syllogism,ideal concurrence and regulatory concurrence share the different logic methods.Ideal concurrence can only be concluded after several syllogism,owing to not a specific article can cover the crime;while regulatory concurrence can be solved through the selection among big premises according to the logic relationship.The distinctions should be comprehended from the essential factors,including theories of perpetration,penalty and crime,which will really help to solve the problem.