论文部分内容阅读
在所有欧洲大陆国家的刑法体系中,法院至少会在量刑中考虑犯罪人对自己的犯罪行为所引起的刑事损害所采取的刑事损害补救措施。然而,关于刑事损害补救措施成立的具体标准以及刑事损害补救措施会对量刑造成多大的影响这两个问题,各国一直没有给出统一且清楚的解释。虽然各国在某些基本问题上取得了一致。但是司法实践中,在刑事损害补救制度的适用问题上各国之间存在很大差异。本文首先简短的介绍德国、奥地利以及西班牙刑法中关于这个问题的立法现状以及这些条文在理论上的解释以及在司法实践中的运用,另外,借助这些现有的解释及运用探寻在整个欧盟具有普遍适用效力的刑事损害补救制度。本文通过分析民事损害补偿制度在刑事司法中所发挥的有限作用引出对于刑事损害补救制度中存在的几个重要问题的讨论。本文所提出的在德国、奥地利以及西班牙刑法中具有普遍适用效力的立法建议还可以解决与刑事损害补偿关系密切的犯罪中止问题,完善以及整合对于该问题的各种理论并启发法学界同仁对于相关问题作进一步探讨。
In all criminal law systems in continental European countries, the courts at least take sentencing into consideration for remedies for criminal damages taken by criminals for criminal damage caused by their criminal acts. However, concerning the specific standards for the establishment of remedies for criminal damages and the extent to which penal remedies will have a disproportionate impact on sentencing, no consistent and clear explanation has been given by all countries. Although all countries have agreed on some basic issues. However, in judicial practice, there are great differences among countries in the application of the remedy system of criminal damage. This article begins with a brief introduction to the legislative status quo on this issue in German, Austrian and Spanish criminal law as well as the theoretical explanations of these articles and their application in judicial practice. In addition, with these existing interpretations and explorations, it is prevalent in the entire EU Applicable system of criminal damage remedy. In this paper, the author discusses the several important issues in the remedy of criminal damage by analyzing the limited role played by civil damage compensation system in criminal justice. The proposed legislative proposal that has universal application in the criminal law of Germany, Austria and Spain can also solve the problem of the suspension of the crime closely related to the compensation of criminal damage, improve and integrate the various theories on the issue and inspire the colleagues Questions for further discussion.