正当防卫限度之判断基准

司法实践中对于防卫限度的认定标准不一。其根源在于:刑事政策的错误指引、防卫限度的解读误差以及《刑法》第20条第3款的模糊定位。此三者具备内在一致性,刑事政策应撇弃“维稳”色彩回归“犯罪预防”功效,进而防卫限度应遵循二元论的分析路径、《刑法》第20条第3款的定位应明确为注意规定,使防卫限度的认定标准统一化,防止司法实践适用错乱。基于此,认定防卫过当应以同时满足防卫手段的不适当性以及防卫结果的明显过当性为标准,讲究综合性。单纯的手段明显过当或者结果明显过当均不宜认定为防卫过当。

Judgment criteria for defense limits

In judicial practice,the criteria for determining the limits of defense are different.Its roots lie in wrong guidance of criminal policy,interpretation errors of defense limits,and fuzzy positioning of Article 20,paragraph 3 in the criminal law.The three have inherent consistency,and the criminal policy should abandon the effect of"stability maintenance",returning to the effect of"crime prevention".The limit of defense should follow the analysis path of dualism,and the positioning of the third paragraph of Article 20 should be clearly defined as the attention regulation.The identification standard of defense limits should be unified to prevent the misuse of judicial practice.Therefore,the identification of excessive defense should simultaneously satisfy the standard of inappropriate defense means and apparent over-appropriateness of defense results.Both elements are necessary for the identification.