西南石油大学学报(社会科学版) ›› 2012, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (6): 59-63.DOI: 10.3863/j.issn.1674-5094.2012.06.012

• 政治学与法学 • 上一篇    下一篇

“扒窃”入刑的思考与实际应用

李芳芳1 李雯2   

  1. 1.四川大学法学院,四川 成都 610225; 2.四川省成都市高新区人民检察院,四川 成都 610041
  • 收稿日期:1900-01-01 修回日期:1900-01-01 出版日期:2012-11-01 发布日期:2012-11-01

Some Thoughts on Separating “Pilferage” asa Crime and its Application in Practice

LI Fang-fang1 LI Wen2   

  1. 1.Law School of Sichuan University,Chengdu Sichuan 610225,China2.People’s Procuratorate of Hitech Zone,Chengdu Sichuan 610041,China
  • Received:1900-01-01 Revised:1900-01-01 Online:2012-11-01 Published:2012-11-01

摘要: 刑法修正案(八)将“扒窃”列为独立罪名,由此引发了理论界的争议与司法实践的困惑。从刑法理论的角度看,“扒窃”属于盗窃的一种,在刑法中已有盗窃罪罪名的前提下,再单列“扒窃”罪,不仅带来对同一行为在罪名上的竞合,而且也会带来处罚上的竞合。司法实践中,由于刑法修正案(八)对“扒窃”罪未作数额上的规定,造成“出手即为犯罪”,使得犯罪数量激增,实质上加重了刑罚,且有违“罪行阶梯论”原理。

关键词: 犯罪, 盗窃, 扒窃, “扒窃”入刑, 刑法修正案(八)

Abstract: The Criminal Law Amendment (VIII) defines “pilferage” as independent charge,which causes the controversy among theorists and confusion in judicial practice. From the perspective of criminal law theory,“pilferage” belongs to theft. Now that there is a crime of theft in the criminal law,a crime of “pilferage” not only brings concurrence of charge to the same act,but also brings concurrence of penalty. In judicial practice,as the amount of property loss caused by “pilferage” is not clearly defined in the Criminal Law Amendment (VIII),the amount of crime cases increases greatly,which aggravates the penalty essentially and violates the crime step theory.

Key words: crime, theft, pilferage, separating “pilferage” as a crime, the Criminal Law Amendment (VIII)

中图分类号: