程海明过失致人死亡案件探析

    本篇论文目录导航：

【题目】程海明过失致人死亡案件探析 
【序言  第一章】程海明防卫基本案情及相关争议焦点 
【2.1 - 2.3】间接故意和过于自信的过失的区别 
【2.4  2.5】正当防卫的认定 
【第三章】程海明案件引发的思考 
【结语/参考文献】故意和过失作为犯罪研究结语与参考文献 



　　中文摘要

　　犯罪主观方面是犯罪主体在实施危害行为时对其行为所能产生的危害结果所抱有的心理态度，是行为人内在的心理表现，揭示了行为人是在怎样的心理状态支配下实施了危害社会的行为，与犯罪客观方面互为表里，成为区分罪与非罪、此罪和彼罪的原则界限之一。但是，故意和过失作为犯罪主观方面的罪过形式，较为抽象，在司法实践中很难区分开来，特别是法院在认定（过于自信的）过失致人死亡和间接故意杀人这两种情况时，由于间接故意和过于自信的过失存在较多的重合部分，常常会出现同一个案件不同的审判结果。对此，大多数学者主张从认识因素和意志因素的角度加以分解：间接故意的场合下，行为人明知自己的行为会造成危害结果，却还是放任这种结果发生；过于自信的过失中，行为人预见了危害结果发生的可能性，却轻信能够避免，致使危害结果的发生。这一见解为深入理解和把握犯罪主观方面的复杂形式以及正确定罪和量刑提供了理论依据。

　　本篇论文以程海明过失致人死亡案为例进行论述，主要分析在司法实践中如何认定间接故意和过于自信的过失，从而得出一些见解，希望对今后类似案件的定性有所帮助。

　　本文除去序言和结语部分外将分成三个部分进行阐述：

　　第一部分：基本案情及相关争议焦点。本部分主要介绍了本案以及相关案例的案件事实、审判结果和争议焦点。

　　第二部分：本案相关法律问题分析。本部分是本文的重点章节，在此以相关刑法理论为依据对本案涉及的争议焦点作出全方位的法律分析和细致的说明。

　　第三部分：本案引发的思考。笔者在本部分对于间接故意和过于自信的过失的区分标准产生了一些看法，并系统阐述了两者区分标准的构建。

　　关键词：程海明，间接故意，过失致死，案件，法律分析

　　Abstract

　　Subjective aspect of crime refers to the psychological attitude that subject of crimes holdsabout the harmful consequences when he implements dangerous acts, and it is inner psychologicalmanifestations of the perpetrator, revealing under what psychological status that the perpetratorimplements actions that endanger the society; it works as exterior and interior with objectiveaspect of crime and becomes one of the principle limits that distinguishes crime and non-crime,this crime and that crime. However, as crime forms of subjective aspect of crime, deliberation andnegligence are quite abstract and are difficult to be differentiated in juridical practices. Especiallywhen the court is affirming （undue assumption） negligent homicide and indirect intent murder,since there are a lot of overlapping parts between indirect intent and negligence with undueassumption, it is quite common that there will be different judgments for the same case.

　　Concerning this problem, most scholars advocate decomposing it from the perspective ofcognition factor and will factor: on indirect intent occasion, the perpetrator is fully aware that hisactions will cause harmful consequences but still indulges it; in negligence with undue assumption,the perpetrator foresees possibility of the harmful consequences but takes it for granted that itcould be avoided and results to the harmful consequences. This understanding provides theoreticalbasis for deeply understanding and grasping the complicated forms and correct conviction andmeasurement of penalty of subjective aspect of crimes.

　　This paper takes Chang Haiming's negligent homicide as an example and analyzes how toaffirm indirect intent and negligence with undue assumption in juridical practices and comes tosome understandings, hoping it will be of some use to further similar cases.

　　Except the preface and the summary, there are three parts in this paper:

　　Part One: Basic case and relative focuses of dispute. This part mainly introduces the realities,judgment results and focus of disputes of this case and relative cases.

　　Part Two: Relative legal analysis of this case. This is the key part of this paper. Based onrelative theories of criminal law, this part makes all-round legal analysis and detailed explanationson the focuses of dispute involved in this case.

　　Part Three: Reflections on this case. The author has some ideas on the distinguishingstandards between indirect intent and negligence with undue assumption and explains secondaryconstruction of their distinguish standards systematically.

　　Key words: Cheng Haiming, Indirect Intent, Negligent Homicide, Case, LegalAnalysis

    目 录

　　中文摘要

　　Abstract

　　序言

　　0.1 选题背景及研究意义

　　0.2 研究现状

　　0.3 研究内容及方法

　　第一章 基本案情及相关争议焦点

　　1.1 基本案情回顾

　　1.2 其它同类型案件

　　1.3 本案涉及的争议焦点

　　第二章 本案相关法律问题分析

　　2.1 间接故意的认定

　　2.1.1 间接故意的认识因素

　　2.1.2 间接故意的意志因素

　　2.2 过于自信的过失的界分

　　2.2.1 过于自信的过失的认识因素

　　2.2.2 过于自信的过失的意志因素

　　2.3 间接故意和过于自信的过失的区别

　　2.3.1 两者的认识因素不同

　　2.3.2 两者的意志因素不同

　　2.4 正当防卫的认定

　　2.4.1 正当防卫的概念

　　2.4.2 正当防卫成立的条件

　　2.4.2.1 防卫起因

　　2.4.2.2 防卫时间

　　2.4.2.3 防卫对象

　　2.4.2.4 防卫意图

　　2.4.2.5 防卫强度

　　2.5 本案争议焦点的全面阐释

　　2.5.1 被告人不成立正当防卫

　　2.5.2 被告人构成（过于自信的）过失致人死亡罪

　　第三章 本案引发的思考

　　3.1 现有区分标准

　　3.2 区分标准的构建

　　3.2.1 认识因素和意志因素相统一

　　3.2.2 主客观相统一

　　3.2.3 科学合理的推定

　　结束语

　　参考文献

　　致谢