对中国刑法绑架罪第二款中“杀害”的解释

The Interpretation of “Killing” in the Paragraph 2 of the Kidnapping Crime under Chinese Criminal Law.

Article 239 of the Chinese Criminal Law provides provisions for the circumstance of “killing the kidnapped person” in the crime of kidnapping. Since the enactment of the Ninth Amendment to the Criminal Law, the second paragraph has added the application of life imprisonment, reflecting to some extent the legislative intention to reduce the use of the death penalty and limit the application of heavy punishments. Both academically and practically, the interpretation that supports the act of “killing” as falling under the circumstance of “killing the kidnapped person” is more widely accepted. However, this understanding has the potential to expand the scope of criminal liability, and therefore should be limited. The circumstance should be narrowly interpreted as only including situations that result in “death”. In terms of semantic connotation, the core meaning of the term “killing” lies in the result of “harming”. In the criminal law system, provisions that specify “killing” as a circumstance and determine it based on the act always accompany emphasis on the act itself. Moreover, considering the legislative purpose and the function of criminal law, there should be a clear distinction between the crime of kidnapping and the crime of intentional homicide. Therefore, in addressing the issue of the second paragraph of the kidnapping crime, the Criminal Law is a matter of legal regulation, and the interpretation should be limited as much as possible to include only situations that result in “death”. This is to maintain the principle of proportionality between crime and punishment, prevent the expansion of the scope of criminal liability, and avoid the consequences of heavy punishments.

中国刑法第二百三十九条对于绑架罪的“杀害被绑架人”情节做出了规定，自刑法修正案九出台以后，其第二款增加了无期徒刑的适用，一定程度上反映出立法者轻死刑、限制重刑适用的修法思路。不论在学术立场还是实务立场，通说更为支持具“杀害”的行为即适用“杀害被绑架人”的情节。该理解有扩张犯罪圈之态势故而应当进行限制，该情节应当被限缩解释为只包含造成“死亡结果”的情况。在语义内涵上，“杀害”一词的词义场域核心即是“害”之结果；在刑法体系中，有规定“杀害”且以行为为确定情节的条文中总伴随着对行为的重点提示；在立法目的及刑法功能中，绑架罪与故意杀人罪应当有明显的界分。刑法在绑架罪第二款的问题上属法律拟制，只能做尽可能地限缩解释为仅包含“杀害的结果”，从而维持罪责刑相适应的原则，防止犯罪圈的扩大，产生重刑的后果。