论罚金刑的几个问题
摘要
罚金刑是一种非常古老的财产刑，不论是在中国法制史上还是外国法制史上，这种刑罚的起源可追溯到原始社会末期。进入阶级社会以后，在奴隶制社会和封建制社会，由于统治阶级推崇严刑峻法，自由刑、生命刑居于中心地位，因此罚金刑在刑罚体系中居于次要的或从属的地位，进入资本主义社会初期后，尽管资产阶级弘扬天赋人权和文明政治，但由于物质生活条件的制约，自由刑仍居中心地位，与经济发展密切相关的罚金刑仍居辅助地位，甚至渐见衰微。进入近代以后，尤其是现代，随着经济的快速发展，社会文明程度的进一步提高，与之相适应的刑罚科学时代替代了酷刑时代，罚金刑作为一种轻缓、开放的刑罚受到了西方国家立法者和司法者的普遍重视。主要表现在两个方面，一方面，有的国家如德国、瑞士、巴西、日本、意大利等国家将其列为刑罚中的主刑，有的国家如奥地利、印度、阿根廷、泰国等不作主刑和附加刑之分，将罚金刑列为刑罚方法之一，与自由刑、生命刑等同。另一方面，从罚金刑的适用范围来看极为广泛，尤其对轻罪、过失犯罪、贪财图利性犯罪几乎都适用罚金刑，有的国家判处的刑事案件中适用罚金刑的就达96％。我国罚金刑在奴隶社会和封建社会刑罚中与国外的地位极为类似，原因也大致相同，但不同的是，我国罚金刑真正进入立法和司法实践还要晚，我国几乎没有经历资本主义社会发展阶段，包括在十一届三中全会以前，受左的错误思潮和十年内乱的影响，民主与法制受到践踏。作为刑罚的罚金刑更是没有立足之地，直到1979年刑法才真正确立罚金刑在我国刑罚体系中的附加刑地位，而且立法上极不完善，适用面很小，仅20个条文，1997年刑法修订时才扩大罚金刑的适用范围，增加到了139个条文，在立法上进一步完善，如罚金刑在刑法中的规定方式、执行方式、数额确定原则等等。
从理论研究上看，国外对罚金刑的研究也起步较早，研究也深入、全面些，我国刑法理论界对罚金刑的研究与罚金刑的自身的发展一样，起步较晚，79年刑法颁布后有一些研究但不充分，97年刑法修订后罚金刑的研究才真正纳入刑法理论研究的视野，主要研究的内容为罚金刑的立法模式、罚金刑的数额确定、罚金刑的执行等专题，但对罚金刑全
面、系统地研究尚不够，尤其是对罚金刑立法空白问题如罚金刑各种处
罚方法的适用情况、罚金刑并罚原则的选择模式、罚金刑执行难的原因
分析及对策等研究得不够或不够深入，笔者正是基于这个考虑撰写此
文，意在对罚金刑进行比较全面和系统的论述，对罚金刑研究的空白问
题作一些探讨。
本文的主要内容包括六个部分，第一部分论述了罚金刑的渊源以及
在刑罚体系中的地位;第二部分论述了罚金刑的功能，在文中提出了罚
金刑对犯罪人家属的“督促功能”这一观点;第三部分从不同的视角分
析了罚金刑的利弊，从优点方面提出了罚金刑具有灵活性、顺应世界刑
罚轻缓、开放发展潮流的观点。在缺陷方面又从另一方面提出了罚金刑
由于其灵活性而扩大了自由裁判空间的观点，最后两相权衡，笔者从辩
证唯物主义、历史唯物主义及公正与效益的兼容性等角度对罚金刑的利
弊进行了比较，得出了罚金刑利大于弊的结论;第四部分，论述了罚金
刑在刑法中的适用形态，提出了我国现行刑法中罚金刑立法规定方式的
缺陷及完善;第五部分阐述了罚金刑数额确定的原则及反思，尤其论述
了我国刑事立法上罚金刑数额确定原则的缺陷，对无限额罚金制提出了
不同看法，并提出了完善措施;第六部分论述了罚金刑的执行，重点是
运用理论联系实际的方法分析了我国司法实践中罚金刑执行难的原因，
提出了解决执行难的立法机制、保障机制及监督机制。本文在写作时，
笔者运用理论与实践相结合的方法、比较方法、演绎推理方法、归纳方
法从不同的角度进行论证，运用刑法学、刑事诉讼法学、犯罪学、犯罪
心理学、法理学、比较法学、中外法制史、哲学等学科知识进行综合研
究。
Fine punishment is a kind of very ancient property punishment. This kind of punishment, regardless of being in the history of Chinese legal system or in the history of foreign legal system, may trace back the final phase of primitive society. With the coming of the class society, fine punishment, because of the highly praise of ruling class for cruel torture and the central position that free punishment and life punishment hold, is on less important or subordinate position in the system of criminal penalty in slavery society and feudal society. Entering the initial stage of capitalist society, free punishment is still at the very core while the fine punishment, which is closely related with economic growth, still holds supplementary position, even declines gradually tiny, though the capitalist class holds in esteem the talented human rights and civilized politics. After modern times, especially the contemporary times, along with the fast development of economy and the further enhancement of social civilizati
on level, punishment scientific times has replaced the times of cruel torture, fine punishment, as a kind of open punishment, has caught universal attention of judicial members legislators, which can be mainly seen from the following two aspects: Firstly, some countries, such as German, Switzerland, Brazil Japan and Italy etc, classify the fine punishment as major punishment while some other countries such as Austria, Indian, Argentina and Thailand etc treat it as one of all punishment and equate it to free punishment and life punishment. Secondly, fine punishment can be applied to many fields such as misdemeanor, involuntary crime and property crime. Among the criminal cases that some countries have sentenced, fine punishment reaches 96%. In our country, fine punishment is in a similar position with that of abroad in slavery society and feudal society punishment, the reason is also approximately identical. But what is different is that the fine punishment of our country is actually put into legislative and
judicial practice more lately and our country doesn't nearly go through the capitalist society. Before the third plenary session of the eleven central committee, owing to the influence
from the left wrong trend of thoughts and the Decade riot, democracy and legal system was trodden on, fine punishment, as a kind of penalty, had been thoroughly denied. Up to 1979, when the criminal law was promulgated, fine punishment was really established in the additional punishment position in the system of criminal law of our country and didn't still perfect very much on legislation and just applied to a very little field. In 1997, the application of fine punishment was enlarged when the criminal law was revised, together with its clauses added to 139 from 20. At the same time, it perfects further on legislation such as the way of stipulating and enforcement and the principle of amount determining of fine punishment etc.
On the ground of theoretical research, the research on fine punishment is launched earlier and deeper abroad than at home. In our country, the theoretical circles of criminal law begin the research of fine punishment later, so does fine punishment develop itself. After the promulgation of the criminal law of 1979 years, fine punishment is researched, it is not until 1997 when the criminal law of 1979 years is revised that the research of fine punishment begin to come to the sight of the theoretical research of criminal law, all studies are focused on the legislative pattern and the amount determining and the enforcement of fine punishment, but it isn't overall and systematic enough for the research of fine punishment ^specially in some legislative blank problems such as the application of penalty ways> the choosing pattern of combined punishment and the analyses of reasons and counter-measure for the difficult enforcement of fine punishment, in consideration of which, the author writes this thesis in order to expound the fine punishment completely and systematically.
This thesis includes the follow
从理论研究上看，国外对罚金刑的研究也起步较早，研究也深入、全面些，我国刑法理论界对罚金刑的研究与罚金刑的自身的发展一样，起步较晚，79年刑法颁布后有一些研究但不充分，97年刑法修订后罚金刑的研究才真正纳入刑法理论研究的视野，主要研究的内容为罚金刑的立法模式、罚金刑的数额确定、罚金刑的执行等专题，但对罚金刑全
面、系统地研究尚不够，尤其是对罚金刑立法空白问题如罚金刑各种处
罚方法的适用情况、罚金刑并罚原则的选择模式、罚金刑执行难的原因
分析及对策等研究得不够或不够深入，笔者正是基于这个考虑撰写此
文，意在对罚金刑进行比较全面和系统的论述，对罚金刑研究的空白问
题作一些探讨。
本文的主要内容包括六个部分，第一部分论述了罚金刑的渊源以及
在刑罚体系中的地位;第二部分论述了罚金刑的功能，在文中提出了罚
金刑对犯罪人家属的“督促功能”这一观点;第三部分从不同的视角分
析了罚金刑的利弊，从优点方面提出了罚金刑具有灵活性、顺应世界刑
罚轻缓、开放发展潮流的观点。在缺陷方面又从另一方面提出了罚金刑
由于其灵活性而扩大了自由裁判空间的观点，最后两相权衡，笔者从辩
证唯物主义、历史唯物主义及公正与效益的兼容性等角度对罚金刑的利
弊进行了比较，得出了罚金刑利大于弊的结论;第四部分，论述了罚金
刑在刑法中的适用形态，提出了我国现行刑法中罚金刑立法规定方式的
缺陷及完善;第五部分阐述了罚金刑数额确定的原则及反思，尤其论述
了我国刑事立法上罚金刑数额确定原则的缺陷，对无限额罚金制提出了
不同看法，并提出了完善措施;第六部分论述了罚金刑的执行，重点是
运用理论联系实际的方法分析了我国司法实践中罚金刑执行难的原因，
提出了解决执行难的立法机制、保障机制及监督机制。本文在写作时，
笔者运用理论与实践相结合的方法、比较方法、演绎推理方法、归纳方
法从不同的角度进行论证，运用刑法学、刑事诉讼法学、犯罪学、犯罪
心理学、法理学、比较法学、中外法制史、哲学等学科知识进行综合研
究。
Fine punishment is a kind of very ancient property punishment. This kind of punishment, regardless of being in the history of Chinese legal system or in the history of foreign legal system, may trace back the final phase of primitive society. With the coming of the class society, fine punishment, because of the highly praise of ruling class for cruel torture and the central position that free punishment and life punishment hold, is on less important or subordinate position in the system of criminal penalty in slavery society and feudal society. Entering the initial stage of capitalist society, free punishment is still at the very core while the fine punishment, which is closely related with economic growth, still holds supplementary position, even declines gradually tiny, though the capitalist class holds in esteem the talented human rights and civilized politics. After modern times, especially the contemporary times, along with the fast development of economy and the further enhancement of social civilizati
on level, punishment scientific times has replaced the times of cruel torture, fine punishment, as a kind of open punishment, has caught universal attention of judicial members legislators, which can be mainly seen from the following two aspects: Firstly, some countries, such as German, Switzerland, Brazil Japan and Italy etc, classify the fine punishment as major punishment while some other countries such as Austria, Indian, Argentina and Thailand etc treat it as one of all punishment and equate it to free punishment and life punishment. Secondly, fine punishment can be applied to many fields such as misdemeanor, involuntary crime and property crime. Among the criminal cases that some countries have sentenced, fine punishment reaches 96%. In our country, fine punishment is in a similar position with that of abroad in slavery society and feudal society punishment, the reason is also approximately identical. But what is different is that the fine punishment of our country is actually put into legislative and
judicial practice more lately and our country doesn't nearly go through the capitalist society. Before the third plenary session of the eleven central committee, owing to the influence
from the left wrong trend of thoughts and the Decade riot, democracy and legal system was trodden on, fine punishment, as a kind of penalty, had been thoroughly denied. Up to 1979, when the criminal law was promulgated, fine punishment was really established in the additional punishment position in the system of criminal law of our country and didn't still perfect very much on legislation and just applied to a very little field. In 1997, the application of fine punishment was enlarged when the criminal law was revised, together with its clauses added to 139 from 20. At the same time, it perfects further on legislation such as the way of stipulating and enforcement and the principle of amount determining of fine punishment etc.
On the ground of theoretical research, the research on fine punishment is launched earlier and deeper abroad than at home. In our country, the theoretical circles of criminal law begin the research of fine punishment later, so does fine punishment develop itself. After the promulgation of the criminal law of 1979 years, fine punishment is researched, it is not until 1997 when the criminal law of 1979 years is revised that the research of fine punishment begin to come to the sight of the theoretical research of criminal law, all studies are focused on the legislative pattern and the amount determining and the enforcement of fine punishment, but it isn't overall and systematic enough for the research of fine punishment ^specially in some legislative blank problems such as the application of penalty ways> the choosing pattern of combined punishment and the analyses of reasons and counter-measure for the difficult enforcement of fine punishment, in consideration of which, the author writes this thesis in order to expound the fine punishment completely and systematically.
This thesis includes the follow
引文
[1] 高铭喧主编，《刑法学》，法律出版社，1984年出版。
[2] 刘清波著，《刑法概论》，台湾三明书店印行，1970年版。
[3] 林山田著，《刑法通论》，三民书局，1986年版。
[4] [苏]H．罚金刑．别利亚耶夫、M．H．科瓦廖夫主编，马改秀、张广贤译《苏维埃刑法总论》，群众出版社，1987年版。
[5] [日]岛保著，《刑事政策学大纲》，清水书店，1930年版。
[6] [日]大塚仁等主编，《大注释刑法》第1卷，青林书院，1991年版。
[7] 邱兴隆、许章润著，《刑罚学》，群众出版社，1988年7月版。
[8] [M][日]菊田幸一著，《犯罪学》，北京群众出版社，1989年版。
[9] 林纪车著，《刑法政策学》[M]．台湾正中书局，1969年版．
[10] 蔡枢衡著，《中国法制史》[M]．广西人民出版社，1983年版。
[11] 林山田著，《刑罚学》，台湾商务印书馆，1983年版。
[12] 张明楷著，《刑法学》，法律出版社，2003年12月第2版。
[13] 马克昌主编，《刑罚通论》，武汉大学出版社出版，1995年12月第1版。
[14] [日]宫泽浩一著，《刑事政策的动向》，成文堂1981年版。
[15] [日]庄子邦雄主编，《刑罚的理论与现实》，岩波书店1972年版。
[16] [英]吉米·边心主编，《立法理论——刑法典原理》，中国人民公安大学出版社，1993年版。
[17] [日]宫泽浩一编，《演习刑事政策》，青林书院新社，1972年版。
[18] Harold J. Vetter and Leonard Territo compile, 《Crime And Justice In America》, WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY, Ist Reprint—1985.
[19] 高铭喧、王作富主编，《新中国刑法的理论与实践》，河北人民出版社，1988年版。
[20] 高铭喧主编，《新中国刑法学研究综述》(1949—1985)，河南人民出版社，1986年版。
[21] Ronald L.Carlson,J.D.,LL.M., Second Edition, 《Criminal Justice Procedure》,Anderson Publishing Co., Third Printing-July, 1981.
[22] 高铭喧主编，《中国刑法学》，中国人民大学出版社，1989年版。
[23] 杨春洗主编，《中国刑法论》，北京大学出版社，1994年版。
[24] Jacques Fortin compile, 《CRIME, JUSTICE & CODIFICATION》, The Carswell Co. Ltd. 1986.
[25] 甘雨沛主编，《刑法学专论》，北京大学出版社，1989年版。
[26] 赵秉志主编，《刑法争议问题研究》，河南人民出版社，1994年版。
[27] 林准主编，《中国刑法教程》，人民出版社，1988年版。
[28] 孙力主编，《罚金刑研究》[M]．中国人民公安大学出版社，1995年版。
[29] 马长生主编，《新编刑法学》，湖南人民出版社，1997年版。
[30] LARRY J.SIEGEL THIRD EDITION, 《CRIMINOLLGY》, WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY. 1989.
[2] 刘清波著，《刑法概论》，台湾三明书店印行，1970年版。
[3] 林山田著，《刑法通论》，三民书局，1986年版。
[4] [苏]H．罚金刑．别利亚耶夫、M．H．科瓦廖夫主编，马改秀、张广贤译《苏维埃刑法总论》，群众出版社，1987年版。
[5] [日]岛保著，《刑事政策学大纲》，清水书店，1930年版。
[6] [日]大塚仁等主编，《大注释刑法》第1卷，青林书院，1991年版。
[7] 邱兴隆、许章润著，《刑罚学》，群众出版社，1988年7月版。
[8] [M][日]菊田幸一著，《犯罪学》，北京群众出版社，1989年版。
[9] 林纪车著，《刑法政策学》[M]．台湾正中书局，1969年版．
[10] 蔡枢衡著，《中国法制史》[M]．广西人民出版社，1983年版。
[11] 林山田著，《刑罚学》，台湾商务印书馆，1983年版。
[12] 张明楷著，《刑法学》，法律出版社，2003年12月第2版。
[13] 马克昌主编，《刑罚通论》，武汉大学出版社出版，1995年12月第1版。
[14] [日]宫泽浩一著，《刑事政策的动向》，成文堂1981年版。
[15] [日]庄子邦雄主编，《刑罚的理论与现实》，岩波书店1972年版。
[16] [英]吉米·边心主编，《立法理论——刑法典原理》，中国人民公安大学出版社，1993年版。
[17] [日]宫泽浩一编，《演习刑事政策》，青林书院新社，1972年版。
[18] Harold J. Vetter and Leonard Territo compile, 《Crime And Justice In America》, WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY, Ist Reprint—1985.
[19] 高铭喧、王作富主编，《新中国刑法的理论与实践》，河北人民出版社，1988年版。
[20] 高铭喧主编，《新中国刑法学研究综述》(1949—1985)，河南人民出版社，1986年版。
[21] Ronald L.Carlson,J.D.,LL.M., Second Edition, 《Criminal Justice Procedure》,Anderson Publishing Co., Third Printing-July, 1981.
[22] 高铭喧主编，《中国刑法学》，中国人民大学出版社，1989年版。
[23] 杨春洗主编，《中国刑法论》，北京大学出版社，1994年版。
[24] Jacques Fortin compile, 《CRIME, JUSTICE & CODIFICATION》, The Carswell Co. Ltd. 1986.
[25] 甘雨沛主编，《刑法学专论》，北京大学出版社，1989年版。
[26] 赵秉志主编，《刑法争议问题研究》，河南人民出版社，1994年版。
[27] 林准主编，《中国刑法教程》，人民出版社，1988年版。
[28] 孙力主编，《罚金刑研究》[M]．中国人民公安大学出版社，1995年版。
[29] 马长生主编，《新编刑法学》，湖南人民出版社，1997年版。
[30] LARRY J.SIEGEL THIRD EDITION, 《CRIMINOLLGY》, WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY. 1989.