International Open Access Journal Platform

事后防卫行为的司法认定 ——以“一体化防卫行为”为进路

Judicial Determination of Post-Event Defense Acts: An Approach Based on “Integrated Defense Acts”

Progress in Social Sciences / 2025,7(5): 379-385 / 2025-05-19 7 4

View Download PDF

• Authors: 刘静雯
• Information:

  北京师范大学法学院，北京

• Keywords:
  Quantitative excessive defense; Post-event defense; Integrated defense acts
  量的防卫过当; 事后防卫; 一体化防卫行为
• Abstract: Traditional criminal law theory uniformly regards post-event defense as untimely defense, imposing overly stringent criteria for determination and neglecting the integrity of defensive acts. To narrow the scope of untimely defense, this paper proposes introducing the concept of “quantitative excessive defense”, which evaluates counteractions during the event and subsequent pursuit actions as “integrated defense acts”, thereby replacing the traditional fragmented evaluation model of “justifiable defense + simple crime” with a “holistic excessive defense” framework. Its legal theoretical basis lies in the recognition that multiple continuous defensive acts possess integrity under criminal law evaluation. Consequently, when determining quantitative excessive defense, the focus should not be on isolating whether post-event defense acts caused significant harm but on assessing whether the integrated defense acts collectively resulted in substantial harm. This approach deducts the illegality corresponding to justifiable counteractions and reflects this deduction in criminal charges. 传统刑法理论将事后防卫一律视为防卫不适时，存在认定标准过于严苛、忽视防卫行为整体性的问题。为缩小防卫不适时的认定范围，可以引入“量的防卫过当”概念，将事中反击与事后追击行为统一评价为“一体化防卫行为”，以“整体成立防卫过当”的评价模式替代传统“正当防卫+单纯犯罪”的分割评价模式。其法理基础在于，多个连续的防卫行为具备刑法评价的整体性。因此，在认定量的防卫过当时，不应当单独考察事后防卫行为是否造成重大损害结果，而是判断一体化防卫行为是否造成了重大损害，扣除与具备正当化事由的反击行为相对应的违法性，并在罪名中加以体现。
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.35534/pss.0705066
• Cite: 刘静雯．事后防卫行为的司法认定——以“一体化防卫行为”为进路［J］．社会科学进展，2025，7（5）：379-385.