由危害行为追溯犯罪故意——结合一起现实案例分析
Retrospective criminal acts by deliberately endangering——Case Analysis combination with reality
陈威
【摘要】
刑法通说认为我国犯罪构成要件分为四个方面，坚持了主客观相统一的原则，在理论上应是科学完备的，但涉及到一些具体案件之中，罪状的描述的不同导致罪名的分歧及定刑的迥异。特别是涉及到犯罪行为人实施危害行为时所持的心理态度时，由于主观意识的抽象性和不定性导致庭审中原告和被告各执一词，法官难以定性的困惑。诸如故意杀人和故意伤害这类犯罪定性时必须考虑犯罪行为人的故意内容，而原有的定罪的思维模式在特殊情况下实在是难以解决。（Qualcomm said that China''s Criminal Law constitute criminal element is divided into four areas, and adhere to the unity of the objective and subjective While, in theory, should be scientifically perfect, but involves some specific cases, the description of the different counts Lead count differences and the different sentence. Particularly in relation to the perpetrator''s acts that endanger the mental attitude, because of the subjective sense of the abstract and not qualitative lead plaintiff and the defendant in the trial Both sides must stick to their own views Judge difficult qualitative puzzled. Such as intentional homicide and intentional injury such crimes must consider when qualitative crimes Human intentionally, and the original conviction mode of thinking in exceptional circumstances it is difficult to solve.）
【关键词】犯罪主观方面；犯罪故意；犯罪客观方面；危害行为；犯罪行为（Crime subjective; crime deliberately; criminal objective; hazards; criminal acts）
【全文】
1 案例简介
某市王某与张某系邻居关系，曾因盖房发生过口角，张某扬言要教训王某。此后不久，张某出钱找到冯某、陈某等人要求对王某予以打击报复，经过踩点、认人等一系列预谋之后，张某亲自带冯某一行到市场上购得尖刀三把，并决定立即前去报复王某，同时制定好了作案后脱逃现场的方案。冯某一行在前去报复王某的途中恰好与其相遇，在王某毫不知情的情况下，冯某一行突然掏出尖刀猛刺王某身体的关键部位，导致王某立即窒息死亡。完事后，冯某一行按原先制定好的脱逃方案逃离现场。人民法院在审理该案过程中，被害人一方认为被告实施了故意杀人的犯罪行为，被告方辩称其行为为故意伤害。
