东北大学学报（社会科学版）

东北大学学报（社会科学版） ›› 2016, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (5): 518-524.DOI: 10.15936/j.cnki.1008-3758.2016.05.012

• 法学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

论刑法中的注意规定

周铭川   

  1. (上海交通大学法学院，上海200030)
  • 收稿日期:2016-01-10 修回日期:2016-01-10 出版日期:2016-09-25 发布日期:2016-09-22
  • 通讯作者: 周铭川
  • 作者简介:周铭川(1975-)，男，江西丰城人，上海交通大学讲师，法学博士，主要从事刑法学研究。
  • 基金资助:
    中央高校基本科研业务费资助项目(N141404001)。

On the Provisions of Attention in Criminal Laws

ZHOU Ming-chuan   

  1. (Law School， Shanghai Jiaotong University， Shanghai 200030， China)
  • Received:2016-01-10 Revised:2016-01-10 Online:2016-09-25 Published:2016-09-22
  • Contact: -
  • About author:-
  • Supported by:
    -

RichHTML

0

PDF (PC)

1242

摘要： “提醒”不是注意规定的本质特征，对构成要件及量刑情节的规定不属于注意规定。由于法律拟制存在着违背罪刑法定原则和构成要件理论等缺陷，应当尽量将可疑条款解释为注意规定而缩小法律拟制的外延。除了刑法明文规定者外，不应承认法律拟制，不应承认过失犯罪向故意犯罪的拟制。但是，与其用注意规定与法律拟制去解释可疑条款，不如适用传统的构成要件理论、罪数形态理论和共犯理论去解释，因为对注意规定与法律拟制的区分，必须以正确适用传统刑法理论为前提。

关键词: 注意规定, 法律拟制, 构成要件, 罪数形态, 共犯

Abstract: “Reminding” is not an essential feature of provisions of attention in that what stipulates constructive conditions and sentencing circumstances is not included in the provisions of attention. Given such defects as the violation of prescribed principles of legality and the shortage of constructive condition theories， it is necessary to confine the scope of legal fictions by interpreting dubious clauses as attention provisions. Except for what is stipulated explicitly in criminal laws， it is not recommended to acknowledge legal fictions and take unintentional crimes as intentional ones. However， it is better to interpret dubious provisions with such theories as constructive conditions， crime quantity and complicity rather than attention provisions and legal fictions because the distinction between attention provisions and legal fictions should be based on the proper applications of traditional criminal laws.

Key words: provision of attention, legal fiction, constructive condition, crime quantity, complicity

中图分类号: