《妨害公务罪问题研究》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《妨害公务罪问题研究（53页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、安徽大学 硕士学位论文 妨害公务罪问题研究 姓名：王清雨 申请学位级别：硕士 专业：刑法学 指导教师：陈结淼 2010-04 I 摘摘 要要 刑法第 277 条规定的是妨害公务罪，立法者在刑法中设置了该罪，旨在为政 府进行正常的社会管理活动提供必不可少的法律保障。 但由于立法条文的简约语 句，导致在司法适用中出现许多疑难与混乱，影响了该类案件裁判标准的严肃性 和统一性。且在刑法理论界，对妨害公务罪的探讨较少且缺乏深度。因此，对妨 碍公务罪加以研究，无论是完善现行刑法还是深化刑法学的理论研究，都具有十 分重要的意义。鉴于此，本文从妨害公务罪的客体和犯罪对象、妨害公务罪的客 观方面以及妨害公务罪的
2、立法完善三个方面对妨害公务罪进行了阐述， 旨在揭示 妨害公务罪的本质含义，从而客观地认定妨害公务罪，解决司法疑难认定问题， 统一司法操作。 犯罪客体是认定犯罪的基础。笔者从本罪名在刑法分则中的位置，得出妨害 公务罪所要保护的是国家法益，并结合妨害公务罪的实质认为，本罪所侵犯的主 要客体是国家正常的管理活动，不仅包括了国家机关的管理活动，还包括红十字 会的正常管理活动。而从犯罪客体的含义出发，排除执行人员的人身权利可以作 为本罪的次要客体，而可以作为刑法附带保护的随机客体而存在。同时，笔者对 妨害公务罪的犯罪对象进行了认定，与执行职务有密切关系的物品、执行人员的 辅助人员以及不具有国家机关工作人
3、员身份的受委托从事公务的人员、 基层群众 自治组织的人员从事特定公务时是可以作为妨害公务行为的犯罪对象， 但执行人 员的亲友不是本罪的犯罪对象。 对于妨害公务罪的客观方面，笔者分为三个方面进行探讨：首先，在公务执 行合法性的问题上，无论是对法条内容的理解还是从刑法的双重保护理念出发， 公务的合法性应当是构成本罪的前提要件。同时，应当从“客观说”的角度、从 形式和内容两个方面对公务的合法性作出判断。其次，是有关本罪手段行为方式 的研究。通过分析，确定了暴力和威胁的含义以及范围，本罪的暴力手段不具有 无形力的特征但却可以指向执行行为人以及与公务有密切联系的物。 对行为人以 侵害自身的人身权益相威胁
4、阻碍公务执行的行为， 除非情势具有特别的紧迫性与 现实性，一般不能认定该种手段为本罪的“威胁” 。 最后，基于刑法保障社会管 理秩序和保护国民合法权益的双重职能考虑，行为手段入罪程度应该持“具体危 II 险犯说”比较适宜。同时，笔者不认为本罪的行为手段存在强度的上限问题，造 成轻伤害以上结果的行为依然构成妨害公务罪， 并主张对社会上大量存在的处于 罪与非罪临界点的案件以治安管理处罚法进行规制。 虽然现行刑法有关妨害公务罪的规定是经过 79 年刑法修改完善而来，在一 定时期、一定范围内适应了司法实践的需要，但仍然存在一定的不足和缺陷，并 随着时代的发展而逐步滞后于处罚该行为的现实需要。 笔者主张
5、将社会生活中妨 害职务执行的不同于暴力、威胁的新型手段增加为本罪的行为手段，还要进一步 扩大本罪的犯罪对象，不仅要增加有公务执行有密切联系的物体，更要将在现实 中从事“公务”的非国家机关工作人员的这一部分人员纳入本罪的保护范围。本 罪第二款规定，仅仅是起到提示性的作用，所以没有保留的必要；而对于第四款 中规定的从事国家安全工作的人员， 侵害人使用一定的行为手段妨害其职务执行 的，应该按照第一款的规定进行定罪处罚，若造成严重后果的，应当按照第一款 从重处罚。 关键词：关键词：妨害公务罪；犯罪对象；行为手段；立法完善 III Abstract The article 277 of Penal Co
6、de is Crime of Hindering Public Affairs. In order to supply necessary protection for the normal governments social management activities, Legislators set the Crime of Hindering Public Affairs. But because of the brief sentence of clause, which lead to several difficulties and confusion, and effect t
7、he seriousness and unification of the standard to settle these law cases. And in the penal theory horizon, the discussion of Crime of Hindering Public Affairs is short of depth. So，no matter to perfect current Penal Code nor to deepen the studies of Criminal Jurisprudence ,to study Crime of Hinderin
8、g Public Affairs has fundamental meaning. Therefore，this paper states Crime of Hindering Public Affairs from three angle of object and target、subjective aspect and legislative perfection, which for the purpose of proclaiming the nature of Crime of Hindering Public Affairs, affirming Crime of Hinderi
9、ng Public Affairs objectively, resolving judicial difficulties and unifying judicial manipulation. The object of crime is basis to affirm crime. Combined with the position in the specific provisions of criminal law, this paper comes to the conclusion that national interest is protected from this cri
10、me， the main object that the crime infringes is normal management activities of nation ， not only the normal official action， but the normal activities of Red Cross. From the concept of the object of crime, the personal rights of staff of state organs and personnel of Red Cross is excluded to be the
11、 subordination object, while is the random object of Crime of Hindering Public Affairs. Meanwhile, the author defines the target of Crime of Hindering Public Affairs. The target of this crime is include the matters which are closely connecting with the performance of official duties, those persons w
12、ho have not identity of state organs workers and the staff of Grass-roots autonomous organization when they perform specific official duties, and is exclude the relatives and friends of the executive staff. This article discusses the subjective aspect of Crime of Hindering Public Affairs from three
13、parts: Firstly, about the legitimacy of official duties, the legitimacy of IV official duties a prerequisite for constituting the crime, not only from the understanding of article of the law, but from the double idea of protection. While, it should be judge the legitimacy of the official duties in a
14、ngle of “Objective said”、 from form and content aspects. Secondly, this paper discusses the modes of behavior means of this crime. Through analysis, the author defines the meaning and scope. The violence means could direct at the matters which are closely connecting with the performance of duties bu
15、t cannot have the characteristic of invisible force. About the action, which actor threatens officials to hindering perform duties in infringing actors personal rights and interests. Lastly，it should be more suitable to go along with “offender of specific danger” for the extent of sin, which is esta
16、blished in the double function of criminal law of ensuring social management and national legal rights and interests. And， the author does not agree with that the strength of behavior means have superior limit, the action ,which results in the consequence is beyond quite light harm, is still commit Crime of Hindering Public Affairs. The author states that the large number cases existing in society which are in a certain condition of guil
