论罚金刑
|
摘要
罚金，它是一种古老的财产刑，在我国刑罚体系中它是一种附加刑，它是人民法院依法判处被告人向国家缴纳一定数额金钱的刑罚。本文从我国刑法及有关修正案对罚金刑适用范围的规定分析认为，挂有罚金刑的罪名占所有刑法罪名的44％，且多为贪利型的犯罪，其目的就是不仅从金钱上剥夺罪犯通过犯罪手段获取的不法利益，而且使其失去想再利用财产犯罪的物质基础。
我国罚金刑既适用较轻的刑事犯罪，也适用于十年以上有期徒刑和无期徒刑、死刑。它的种类有无限额罚金制、限额罚金制、倍比或比例罚金制，其数额的确定也不是独立的，而是与罚金刑的法定适用方式相结合的，具体方式有单科罚金制(仅对单位犯罪适用)、选科罚金制、并科罚金制、复合罚金制和双罚制。总之，新刑法实施五年来的司法实践证明了在罚金刑惩治犯罪、教育犯罪和防止犯罪方面的优越性极其自身价值，也具有一定的灵活性。但理论界同时也认识到司法实践中对罚金刑具体操作还存在不足和困惑。首先，罚金刑的适用范围应进一步扩大。刑法典在贪污贿赂等国家工作人员的犯罪以及有关财产型犯罪没有设置相应的罚金刑有悖于罚金刑的性质，同时，罚金刑在整个刑法典中过失犯罪适用的比例小，这于西方国家把罚金刑作为过失犯罪的感化手段和主要方法不符。其次，我们应认识到罚金刑是刑事责任的一部分，罪犯在被判处罚金时，其相应的自由刑应有所轻缓。同时，罚金刑数额在有关罪名中过高，不便于在司法实践中执行。再次，罚金刑适用与量刑情节的关系不明确。尤其在无限额罚金制里，针对犯罪分子具有的从重、从轻或减轻处罚的情节，罚金刑的从重、从轻或减轻的情节就无法落实。为此，笔者建议在未来的刑法修正案和司法解释中对罚金刑的适用应作以下几方面的完善。第一，应建立罚金刑易科制度。由于罚金刑在刑事审判中适用率大为提高，但因为其自身威慑力、强制力不够等原因，出现了诸如判而不缴、比例失衡乃至
空判等一系列问题。世界上如德国、美国等国家均在刑法典中规定
罚金刑易科制度，多年来，由于我国立法界对此持否定态度，使得
罚金刑的适用过于僵化，甚至采取了不符合诉讼程序的操作。近年
来，我国理论界从正确的刑罚观和价值观出发，对罚金刑易科提出
了可以借鉴甚至肯定的建议即在自由刑可以被金钱量化以及罚金刑
可以被公益性劳动所替换的设想。第二，罚金刑种类应科学化。我
国刑法典在对无限额罚金制适用上比例过大，有的罚金数额过高，
这与我国现阶段人均收入不平衡的实际情况不符，应采用日额罚金
制、限额罚金制和倍比罚金制，避免法官在适用时主观因素，有能
使行为人对应承受罚金数额的自我确定，便于在判决后执行。第
三，必并制罚金刑适用比例过高。由于罚金刑也是罪犯承担刑事责
任的一部分，和自由刑并用时，还可以操作，但如果和生命刑并用
时，就看不出罚金刑是刑事责任的组成部分了。同时，在一些罪名
中应当可以适用选科或单科罚金，其社会效果远比并处罚金的社会
效果好。第四，未成年人犯罪可以单处罚金。随着现代文明的进步
和人道主义的发展，古典报应主义刑罚观逐渐为历史所淘汰，尤其
对未成年人犯罪以实现其成功转化和回归及社会秩序的良性和谐为
终极目标。现今世界，未成年人犯罪已不是一个或几个国家的问
题，而是一个世界性的问题，由于未成年人是一个特殊的群体，各
国都采取了有利于他们成长的措施，如非监禁处罚、自由刑易科
等。而我国刑法典除可以对未成年人判处缓刑外，单处罚金的情况
很少，为体现国家对未成年人的人文关怀，扩大对该群体在刑罚上
适用单处罚金是一个合乎时代的举措。
各国关于罚金刑的立法和实践很不相同，各具特色，我国在这
方面的刑事立法更显得薄弱。为适应世界刑法轻缓化的趋势，扩大
罚金刑的适用范围，提高罚金刑在打击和预防犯罪中的作用已成必
然。
As an ancient property-related punishment, monetary fine is a supplementary punishment under China's criminal punishment system, according to which the people's court will condemn the accused to pay a certain amount of money to the country. In this thesis, the author analyzes the applicable scope of the monetary fine regulated under China's Penal Law as well as the relative amendments, and he also finds that the charges involving monetary fine are 44% of all the charges under the penal law, most of which are profit-seeking offenses. Therefore, he thinks that the purposes of the monetary fine are not only to deprive the illegal interests acquired by the criminals by means of crime, but also make the criminals lose the material basis to utilize their property to commit crimes again.
Monetary fine is not only a light penal, but also a punishment applied to the criminals who will be sentenced more than ten years, an imprisonment for life, or a death penalty. The types of it include unlimited monetary fine, limited monetary fine, pro rata monetary fine or proportional monetary fine. The amount of money will be independently determined in conjunction with the
mandatory applicable methods of monetary fine. Specifically, the types include the systems of uniquely imposing fines (for the institutional crimes only), selectively imposing fines, concurrently imposing fines, compound fines, and double punishments. Generally speaking, since the new penal law came into force 5 years ago, the judicial practice has proved that the system of monetary fine has its own values and advantages in the punishment and education on criminals and the prevention of crimes. However, the theory circle also recognizes that there are some shortcomings and confusions in the implementation of monetary fine in the judicial practice.
Firstly, the applicable scope of monetary fine shall be further enlarged. The regulations that monetary fine cannot be applied to the crimes committed by state officials such as bribery and corruption as well as the crimes against property are inconsistent with its nature, and that monetary fine can only be applied to a small part of negligent crimes is also inconsistent with the western way, by which the western countries regard monetary fine as a main method to help criminals to change.
Secondly, we should realize that monetary fine is a part of penal responsibility, so that the penalty against freedom shall be
mitigated when monetary fine has already been sentenced to the
criminals. Moreover, the amount of monetary fine is too large for some charges to be carried out in the justice practice.
Finally, the relationship between the application of monetary fine and the circumstances of sentencing is unclear. Especially for the unlimited monetary fine, it is difficult to sentence a heavier, lighter, or mitigation fine according to the corresponding circumstances concerning the criminals.
Based on this, the author suggests that the application of monetary fine shall be improved in the future amendments of the penal law and relative judicial interpretations from the following aspects:
Firstly, the transferable monetary fine shall be adopted. Because of the reasons that monetary fine isn't enforceable and deterrent enough while it is applied in penal trials much more often than before, the issues that the criminals don't pay the entire fine, sometimes even none of it, and the amount of the fine is imbalanced appear. Some countries like Germany and America have adopted the transferable monetary fine under their penal laws. For a long time, the law-making body of China has hold a negation attitude towards it so that the application of monetary fine is too stiff and some relative operations are inconsistent with the rules of criminal procedure. Recently, the theory circle in
China suggests that the transferable monetary fine be referred or even adopted to make it possible to transfer the penalty against freedom into fine or to transfer the fine into the labor for public welfare on the basis of
我国罚金刑既适用较轻的刑事犯罪，也适用于十年以上有期徒刑和无期徒刑、死刑。它的种类有无限额罚金制、限额罚金制、倍比或比例罚金制，其数额的确定也不是独立的，而是与罚金刑的法定适用方式相结合的，具体方式有单科罚金制(仅对单位犯罪适用)、选科罚金制、并科罚金制、复合罚金制和双罚制。总之，新刑法实施五年来的司法实践证明了在罚金刑惩治犯罪、教育犯罪和防止犯罪方面的优越性极其自身价值，也具有一定的灵活性。但理论界同时也认识到司法实践中对罚金刑具体操作还存在不足和困惑。首先，罚金刑的适用范围应进一步扩大。刑法典在贪污贿赂等国家工作人员的犯罪以及有关财产型犯罪没有设置相应的罚金刑有悖于罚金刑的性质，同时，罚金刑在整个刑法典中过失犯罪适用的比例小，这于西方国家把罚金刑作为过失犯罪的感化手段和主要方法不符。其次，我们应认识到罚金刑是刑事责任的一部分，罪犯在被判处罚金时，其相应的自由刑应有所轻缓。同时，罚金刑数额在有关罪名中过高，不便于在司法实践中执行。再次，罚金刑适用与量刑情节的关系不明确。尤其在无限额罚金制里，针对犯罪分子具有的从重、从轻或减轻处罚的情节，罚金刑的从重、从轻或减轻的情节就无法落实。为此，笔者建议在未来的刑法修正案和司法解释中对罚金刑的适用应作以下几方面的完善。第一，应建立罚金刑易科制度。由于罚金刑在刑事审判中适用率大为提高，但因为其自身威慑力、强制力不够等原因，出现了诸如判而不缴、比例失衡乃至
空判等一系列问题。世界上如德国、美国等国家均在刑法典中规定
罚金刑易科制度，多年来，由于我国立法界对此持否定态度，使得
罚金刑的适用过于僵化，甚至采取了不符合诉讼程序的操作。近年
来，我国理论界从正确的刑罚观和价值观出发，对罚金刑易科提出
了可以借鉴甚至肯定的建议即在自由刑可以被金钱量化以及罚金刑
可以被公益性劳动所替换的设想。第二，罚金刑种类应科学化。我
国刑法典在对无限额罚金制适用上比例过大，有的罚金数额过高，
这与我国现阶段人均收入不平衡的实际情况不符，应采用日额罚金
制、限额罚金制和倍比罚金制，避免法官在适用时主观因素，有能
使行为人对应承受罚金数额的自我确定，便于在判决后执行。第
三，必并制罚金刑适用比例过高。由于罚金刑也是罪犯承担刑事责
任的一部分，和自由刑并用时，还可以操作，但如果和生命刑并用
时，就看不出罚金刑是刑事责任的组成部分了。同时，在一些罪名
中应当可以适用选科或单科罚金，其社会效果远比并处罚金的社会
效果好。第四，未成年人犯罪可以单处罚金。随着现代文明的进步
和人道主义的发展，古典报应主义刑罚观逐渐为历史所淘汰，尤其
对未成年人犯罪以实现其成功转化和回归及社会秩序的良性和谐为
终极目标。现今世界，未成年人犯罪已不是一个或几个国家的问
题，而是一个世界性的问题，由于未成年人是一个特殊的群体，各
国都采取了有利于他们成长的措施，如非监禁处罚、自由刑易科
等。而我国刑法典除可以对未成年人判处缓刑外，单处罚金的情况
很少，为体现国家对未成年人的人文关怀，扩大对该群体在刑罚上
适用单处罚金是一个合乎时代的举措。
各国关于罚金刑的立法和实践很不相同，各具特色，我国在这
方面的刑事立法更显得薄弱。为适应世界刑法轻缓化的趋势，扩大
罚金刑的适用范围，提高罚金刑在打击和预防犯罪中的作用已成必
然。
As an ancient property-related punishment, monetary fine is a supplementary punishment under China's criminal punishment system, according to which the people's court will condemn the accused to pay a certain amount of money to the country. In this thesis, the author analyzes the applicable scope of the monetary fine regulated under China's Penal Law as well as the relative amendments, and he also finds that the charges involving monetary fine are 44% of all the charges under the penal law, most of which are profit-seeking offenses. Therefore, he thinks that the purposes of the monetary fine are not only to deprive the illegal interests acquired by the criminals by means of crime, but also make the criminals lose the material basis to utilize their property to commit crimes again.
Monetary fine is not only a light penal, but also a punishment applied to the criminals who will be sentenced more than ten years, an imprisonment for life, or a death penalty. The types of it include unlimited monetary fine, limited monetary fine, pro rata monetary fine or proportional monetary fine. The amount of money will be independently determined in conjunction with the
mandatory applicable methods of monetary fine. Specifically, the types include the systems of uniquely imposing fines (for the institutional crimes only), selectively imposing fines, concurrently imposing fines, compound fines, and double punishments. Generally speaking, since the new penal law came into force 5 years ago, the judicial practice has proved that the system of monetary fine has its own values and advantages in the punishment and education on criminals and the prevention of crimes. However, the theory circle also recognizes that there are some shortcomings and confusions in the implementation of monetary fine in the judicial practice.
Firstly, the applicable scope of monetary fine shall be further enlarged. The regulations that monetary fine cannot be applied to the crimes committed by state officials such as bribery and corruption as well as the crimes against property are inconsistent with its nature, and that monetary fine can only be applied to a small part of negligent crimes is also inconsistent with the western way, by which the western countries regard monetary fine as a main method to help criminals to change.
Secondly, we should realize that monetary fine is a part of penal responsibility, so that the penalty against freedom shall be
mitigated when monetary fine has already been sentenced to the
criminals. Moreover, the amount of monetary fine is too large for some charges to be carried out in the justice practice.
Finally, the relationship between the application of monetary fine and the circumstances of sentencing is unclear. Especially for the unlimited monetary fine, it is difficult to sentence a heavier, lighter, or mitigation fine according to the corresponding circumstances concerning the criminals.
Based on this, the author suggests that the application of monetary fine shall be improved in the future amendments of the penal law and relative judicial interpretations from the following aspects:
Firstly, the transferable monetary fine shall be adopted. Because of the reasons that monetary fine isn't enforceable and deterrent enough while it is applied in penal trials much more often than before, the issues that the criminals don't pay the entire fine, sometimes even none of it, and the amount of the fine is imbalanced appear. Some countries like Germany and America have adopted the transferable monetary fine under their penal laws. For a long time, the law-making body of China has hold a negation attitude towards it so that the application of monetary fine is too stiff and some relative operations are inconsistent with the rules of criminal procedure. Recently, the theory circle in
China suggests that the transferable monetary fine be referred or even adopted to make it possible to transfer the penalty against freedom into fine or to transfer the fine into the labor for public welfare on the basis of
引文
①邱兴隆．刑罚理性评论 [M] 中国政法大学出版社 1999．
②赵秉志．侵犯财产罪研究 [M] 中国法制出版社 1998．
③周少元、何宁生．中国法制史 [M] 人民法院出版社、中国社会科学出版社 2003。
④钟安惠．西方刑罚功能论 [M] 中国方正出版社 2001．
②赵秉志．侵犯财产罪研究 [M] 中国法制出版社 1998．
③周少元、何宁生．中国法制史 [M] 人民法院出版社、中国社会科学出版社 2003。
④钟安惠．西方刑罚功能论 [M] 中国方正出版社 2001．