论文部分内容阅读
冯军教授立足于危险驾驶罪的规范目的,提出危险驾驶罪属于过失抽象危险犯;还指出,若认为本罪属于故意抽象危险犯,将会导致罪刑失衡等系列体系上难题。冯军教授提出的罪刑失衡等问题实际上并不存在,其中有些难题并不是将本罪解释为故意抽象危险犯导致的。将危险驾驶罪理解为过失抽象危险犯有违抽象危险犯的特点与构造,将导致现有相关罪名体系的混乱。现代社会,过失抽象危险犯是客观存在的,但并不存在冯军教授认可的“对构成要件行为是故意,对抽象危险是过失”的过失抽象危险犯。我国刑法要慎重对待抽象危险犯(特别是过失抽象危险犯),避免刑罚处罚的过度化。
Based on the normative purpose of dangerous driving offense, Professor Feng Jun proposed that dangerous driving offense belonged to abstract dangerous crime of negligence. He also pointed out that if this crime is considered to be a deliberately abstract dangerous criminal, it will cause a series of system problems such as the imbalance of crime and penalty. Professor Feng Jun’s crime and punishment imbalances and other issues do not exist in fact, some of which are not the problem of this crime is interpreted as deliberately abstract dangerous criminals caused. Understanding dangerous driving offense as the abstract danger of negligence violates the characteristics and construction of abstract dangerous criminals will lead to the confusion of the existing related crimes. In modern society, absurd abstract dangerous criminals exist objectively, but there is no absurd abstract dangerous criminals recognized by Professor Feng Jun as “the negligent absurdity of the constituent elements”. China’s criminal law should be treated with caution abstract dangerous criminals (especially abusive abstract dangerous criminals), to avoid excessive penalty penalties.