对适时防卫与事后防卫的再认识

如何区分适时防卫与事后防卫,在刑法理论上存在着争论,在刑法实践中也不易操作."不法侵害行为的结束"不等于"不法侵害的结束",不法侵害是否正在进行不能单纯从犯罪行为是否继续或犯罪行为是否既遂来判断,而关键看防卫人的行为在特定的环境中还有无可能有效排除不法侵害行为或行为导致的危险状态;是适时防卫还是事后防卫,应以不法侵害是否结束为判断标准,而不应以不法侵害行为是否结束为判断标准.

A Re -cognition of Timely Defense and Afterwards Defense

There is a controversy about how to distinguish timely defense and afterwards defense in criminal theory and difficulty in operating in judiciary practice.The ending of behaviors of unlawful infringement doesn't necessarily mean the ending of unlawful infringement.Whether the unlawful infringement is ongoing should not be judged only by whether the criminal behavior is ongoing or accomplished,but more importantly to see whether the defender's behavior can effectively exclude unlawful infringement and dangerous state resulted from it or not under particular situation.Being timely defense or afterwards defense should be judge by the standard of whether the unlawful infringement is ended but not whether the behavior of unlawful infringement is ended.