애스크로AIPublic Preview
← 학술논문 검색
학술논문중국법연구2019.08 발행

英美法视阙下的拒不执行判决、裁定行为刑法规制比较 - 以中国刑法为立足点 -

Comparison of the Criminal Law Regulation of Refusal to Execute Judgment and Order in Common Law - Stand on Chinese Criminal Law -

范 硕(中国政法大学)

39권, 229~255쪽

초록

“执行难”作为中国司法长期存在的现象,不仅有害胜诉方合法权益,而且有损司法权威. 怎样更好地通过刑法实现法院裁判内容,切实维护胜诉方合法权利,英美法系国家或地区刑事法律对拒不执行判决、裁定行为的规制,具有现实参考意义. 大多数英美法系国家或地区对拒不执行法院的裁判行为以藐视法庭罪论处,但藐视法庭罪的适用范围却比中国刑法拒不执行判决、裁定罪要广得多,其适用一切有碍法庭审理及裁判生效(正常司法活动)的行为. 追溯藐视法庭罪的发展历程,其起源于12世纪的英国普通法,并深远影响了诸多被殖民地区法律,英美法系国家或地区大多都承继或移植了英国《藐视法庭法》或普通法上的相关的规定,并对其进行了适宜自身的发展. 传统意义上的藐视法庭罪可分为刑事藐视法庭罪和民事藐视法庭罪,其中民事藐视法庭罪与中国刑法的拒不执行判决、裁定罪最为契合,处罚对象都为不履行法院裁判的行为. 但拒不执行判决、裁定的行为同时也能构成刑事藐视法庭罪,这也是诸多学者认为刑事藐视法庭罪与民事藐视法庭罪并没有明显界限的原因. 刑事藐视法庭罪和民事藐视法庭罪的处罚种类都有罚款和监禁,但不同的是,刑事藐视法庭罪监禁期限通常有明确的限制规定,而民事藐视法庭罪的监禁期限则可以持续到行为人履行法院的裁判为止. 拒不执行判决裁定罪与藐视法庭罪都以行为人能够实际履行法院裁判为前提,不同的是,当行为人只要实施可能危及法院裁判实现的相关行为,经过一定的简要程序和法官确认,藐视法庭罪便可提前介入,并且,藐视法庭罪与执行制度的联动融贯,使得法院裁判执行效果显著. 英美法藐视法庭罪的弹性机制,使得法律目的的实现尤为显著. 比较中国司法实践,行为人履行义务换取的“从宽处罚”(刑期或刑种降低),刑法介入仍显得过剩,而对于甘受有限刑期而仍拒履行义务的行为人,刑罚的张力又显得不足. 在诉讼程序方面,行为人只要实施可能危及之后法院裁判实现的相关行为,刑法便可以提前介入,并且大多不受一般诉讼程序的限制,加之藐视法庭罪与执行制度联动融贯,在执行效果上起到了很好的作用,都值得中国刑事司法思考与借鉴.

Abstract

As a long-standing phenomenon in China's judiciary, difficult execution not only harms the legitimate rights and interests of the winning party, but also damages the judicial authority. How to better realize the content of court judgment through the criminal law, and effectively protect the legal rights of the winning party, the criminal law of the common law countries or regions has practical reference significance for the regulation of the refusal to execute the judgment and order. Most countries or regions of the common law system regard the refusal to enforce the judgment of the court as the crime of contempt of court. However, the scope of application of the contempt of court is much broader than that of the crime of refusal to enforce the judgment or order of the Chinese criminal law. Tracing back to the development of the contempt of court, it originated from the British common law in the 12th century and has exerted a profound influence on the laws of many colonial regions. The traditional contempt of court can be divided into criminal contempt and civil contempt. The civil contempt is the most consistent with the crime of refusing to enforce the judgment or order in the Chinese criminal law. However, refusal to enforce a judgment or order can also constitute criminal contempt, which is why many scholars believe that there is no clear distinction between criminal contempt and civil contempt. The penalties for both criminal contempt and civil contempt include a fine and imprisonment, but the period of imprisonment for criminal contempt is usually clearly defined, while for civil contempt the period of imprisonment may continue until the actor has complied with the court's decision. Both the crime of refusing to carry out a judgment or order and the contempt of court must be on the premise of the behavior person can actually perform court, when a person as long as the implementation may endanger the related behavior of the court to achieve, through certain procedures and the judge to confirm briefly, contempt can early intervention, and linkage melts penetration of contempt of court and implementation system, makes the court for enforcement. The flexible mechanism of contempt of court makes the realization of legal purpose especially remarkable. Compared with China's judicial practice, there is still a surplus of criminal law intervention in the lenient punishment for the offender's performance of obligations, while the tension of penalty is insufficient for the offender who refuses to fulfill his obligations despite accepting a limited term of imprisonment. In legal proceedings, as long as the implementation of offender endanger court judge implementation of relevant behavior, criminal law can early intervention, and not be restricted by the general procedure, mostly linkage melt injection combined with contempt of court and implementation system, has played a good role in the implementation effect, is worth the Chinese criminal justice thinking and using for reference.

발행기관:
한중법학회
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.22415/clr.2019.39..008
분류:
비교법학

AI 법률 상담

이 논문의 주제에 대해 더 알고 싶으신가요?

460만+ 법률 자료에서 관련 판례·법령·해석례를 찾아 답변합니다

AI 상담 시작
英美法视阙下的拒不执行判决、裁定行为刑法规制比较 - 以中国刑法为立足点 - | 중국법연구 2019 | AskLaw | 애스크로 AI