陷害教唆的司法适用研究

A Study on the Judicial Application of Incrimination and Instigation

摘要: 现今教唆理论下陷害教唆的认定模糊不清，在司法适用中仍沿用教唆间接正犯的观点定罪量刑，由于陷害教唆中教唆行为的双重目的，司法裁判被简单认定为修正的共同犯罪而作为教唆犯等同定罪，依据主客观相统一难以对陷害教唆行为进行定罪量刑。为了弥补陷害教唆理论的缺陷，更为了是司法判决具有合理性与可说服性，从陷害教唆的定性与可罚性入手，区分其与一般教唆行为间的差别并通过社会危险性与人身危险性给予可罚性理论肯定，厘清陷害教唆的行为类型与主体类型，将边界清晰化并把成立要件与行为类型的整合更是将可罚性理论的升华与补充，通过不同犯罪形态的陷害教唆研究得出一定的司法适用理论，并将诱惑侦查区别于陷害教唆究其主体要件与分类深入讨论，给予陷害教唆犯罪行为的定罪与司法适用逻辑性框架与轮廓。

Abstract: Nowadays, the identification of frame-up instigation under the theory of instigation is unclear, and the view of indirect instigation is still used in the judicial application for conviction and sentencing. Due to the dual purpose of instigation in frame-up instigation, the judicial judgment is simply identified as a modified joint crime and as an instigator equivalent to conviction. It is difficult to conviction and sentencing the frame-up instigation based on the unity of subjective and objective. In order to make up for the defects of the theory of framing and abetting, and more importantly to make the judicial judgment reasonable and persuasive, starting with the qualitative and punitive nature of framing and abetting, distinguish the difference between it and the general abetting behavior, and give the theoretical affirmation of the punitive nature through the social and personal dangers, and clarify the type of behavior and subject type of framing and abetting, The clarification of the boundary and the integration of the elements of establishment and the types of conduct are the sublimation and supplement of the theory of punishment. Through the study of the framing and abetting of different criminal forms, we can draw a certain theory of judicial application, and further discuss the main elements and classification of the temptation investigation from the framing and abetting, and give the logical framework and outline of the conviction and judicial application of the framing and abetting criminal act.