由“许霆案”看罪刑均衡

“许霆案”的出现一时间引起了社会公众的广泛关注。许霆盗取ATM机的行为是否构成盗窃罪以及量刑是否科学、公正，成为本案的焦点。根据罪刑法定原则，许霆的行为符合盗窃罪的规定，但根据罪刑均衡原则，法院对许霆的量刑不免失之过重。由此反映出我国罪刑均衡原则在立法与司法中存在着解释不均衡、体系不均衡等问题，因此，需要对罪刑均衡原则重新进行审视，以避免类似“许霆案”的再次发生。

Balance between Crime and Punishment Viewed from "Xu Ting Case"

The appearance of "Xu Ting case" has aroused the social public's widespread concern.Xu Ting steals the ATM machine whether to constitute the larceny and sentencing whether scientific and fair,become the focus of the case.According to the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime,Xu Ting's behavior conforms to the larceny;according to the principle of balance between crime and punishment,the sentence is too heavy to Xu Ting.This reflect the principle of balance between crime and punishment has some problems in the legislate and judicature,such as the explanation and the system are not balance.Therefore,we need to re-examine the principle of balance between crime and punishment,in order to avoid similar case to happen again.