论文部分内容阅读
紧急避险是指为了国家、公共利益、本人或者他人的人身、财产和其他权利免受正在发生的危险,迫不得已的情形下而采取的牺牲另外相对较小的合法权益的行为。而在现实的生活中,往往会出现为了保全一方的生命而牺牲另一方生命的案件,在这种一命换命的情形下,是否还可以适用我国刑法中的紧急避险来免责?一命换命从紧急避险的限度条件的角度来看又属于什么法律性质?生命权是否可以作为我国紧急避险的客体呢?这些问题都是近年来我国刑法界学者讨论和争议的焦点。本文主要是从我国刑法中紧急避险的限度条件入手,分别论证生命权是否可以作为我国紧急避险的客体及紧急避险在涉及到生命权并造成他人生命权损害的情况下,是否可以以紧急避险来主张免责等方面来论证。
Emergency hedging refers to the sacrifice of other relatively small legitimate rights and interests for the benefit of the state and the public as well as the personal, property and other rights of oneself or others, against the dangers and threats that are taking place. In real life, there are often cases of sacrificing one another’s life in order to preserve one’s life. Under such a life-changing situation, can we still apply the emergency avoidance in our criminal law to exempt one? Whether the life right can serve as the object of emergency avoidance in China from the perspective of the limit conditions of emergency hedging? These issues are the focus of discussion and controversy of scholars in criminal law circles in recent years. This article is mainly from the limit conditions of our country’s criminal law emergency hedge, to prove whether the right of life can be used as the object of emergency and hedging in our country when it comes to the right to life and damage the right to life of others, whether it can be Emergency hedging to advocate exemption and other aspects to demonstrate.