earticle

영어

With the development of modern industry, environmental pollution and destruction in China have become the main problems faced by contemporary society. Behind this problem is the increase in the number of environmental crimes. From 2012 to 2019, China's environmental crime generally showed an upward trend, especially in 2014 and 2019, the crime of polluting the environment, the crime of illegally felling trees, the crime of indiscriminately felling trees, the crime of illegal fishing aquatic products, the crime of illegal hunting, and the crime of illegal occupation of agricultural land is relatively high. The emergence of this phenomenon is related to the legal punishment and sentencing of environmental crimes. Based on the current situation of environmental crime, this paper analyzes the shortcomings of freedom penalty, fine penalty, qualification penalty and non-penalty measures from the perspective of criminal punishment. Compared with other crimes, the legal penalty of environmental crime is lighter, the sentencing range of some environmental crimes is single, the penalty provisions violate the principle of responsibility, and the probation rate of environmental crimes is generally higher. In the aspect of fine penalty, there is no specific amount standard in the fine penalty of environmental crime, which is lack of guidance. In terms of qualification punishment, the limitation of the content of qualification punishment and the lack of qualification punishment are another obvious defect in the legislation of environmental crime in China. In the aspect of non-penalty measures, the scope of application of non-penalty measures in environmental crime is narrow and the direction is insufficient. Based on the above problems, this paper puts forward the corresponding improvement measures. In the aspect of freedom penalty, first of all, the freedom penalty of the crime of polluting the environment, the crime of illegally felling trees, the crime of indiscriminately felling trees, the crime of illegal fishing aquatic products, the crime of illegal hunting, and the crime of illegal occupation of agricultural land should be appropriately adjusted. The crime of environmental pollution is divided into intentional crime and negligent crime, and the legal punishment of intentional crime of environmental pollution should be higher than that of negligent crime of environmental pollution. The maximum legal penalty of the crime of illegally felling trees and the crime of indiscriminately felling trees should not be lower than that of larceny. The range of sentencing will be increased for the crimes of illegal fishing of aquatic products, illegal hunting and illegal occupation of agricultural land. It is necessary to control the probation in these cases. Secondly, in the aspect of fine penalty, multiple fine penalty and limited fine penalty are applied to the fine penalty of environmental crime. Thirdly, in terms of qualification punishment, adjust the content and scope of application of qualification punishment. In addition, it is related to the deprivation of professional qualification. In terms of units, it is necessary to increase and limit the scope of business and deprive units of the qualification to engage in specific industries. At the same time, the scope of application of qualification penalty will be extended to all environmental crimes. Finally, in terms of non-penalty measures, Article 37 of the criminal law adds similar provisions such as “if necessary, order the defendant to restore to the original state, eliminate the influence, and treat within a time limit.” The performance of this obligation is regarded as one of the manifestations of the perpetrator's repentance, which can also be considered as appropriate in the discretionary execution of the penalty.

중국어

随着近代产业的发展，中国的环境污染和破坏已成为当代社会面临的主要问题。这 种问题的背后与环境犯罪数量的增加有关。从2012年到2019年，中国环境犯罪总体呈 上升趋势，特别是在2014年和2019年，环境犯罪大幅度增加。其中，污染环境罪、非 法捕捞水产品罪、非法狩猎罪、非法占用农业用地罪、滥伐林木罪、盗伐林木罪的犯 罪比例总体上较高。这种现象的出现与环境犯罪的法定刑与量刑有关。本论文以环境 犯罪的现状为基础，从刑事处罚层面分析自由刑、罚金刑、资格刑以及非刑事处罚措 施等方面存在的不足之处。环境犯罪的自由刑方面，相比较其他犯罪，法定刑整体上 较轻，部分环境犯罪的量刑幅度较为单一，处罚规定违反责任原则，环境犯罪的缓刑 适用率普遍较高。罚金刑方面，环境犯罪中的罚金刑规定没有具体的数额标准，缺乏 指导性。资格刑方面，资格刑内容的局限和资格刑的缺乏可以说也是中国环境犯罪立 法上的另一个明显缺陷。非刑罚性处置措施方面，环境犯罪中非刑罚性处置措施适用 范围较窄，指向性不足。本文以上述问题为基础，进而提出相应的改善措施。即在自 由刑方面，首先，对犯罪发生率高的污染环境罪、盗伐林木罪、滥伐林木罪、非法捕 捞水产品罪、非法狩猎罪、非法占用农用地罪的自由刑进行适当调整。将污染环境罪 分为故意犯罪和过失犯罪，且故意污染环境罪法定刑应高于过失污染环境罪的法定刑。盗伐林木罪和滥伐林木罪的法定最高刑应不低于盗窃罪。对非法捕捞水产品罪、 非法狩猎罪、非法占用农用地罪增加量刑幅度。有必要控制这些犯罪的缓刑适用情 况。其次，在罚金刑方面，将倍比罚金刑和限额罚金刑应用到环境犯罪的罚金刑中。 再次，在资格刑方面，调整资格刑的内容和适用范围。自然人方面，增设与禁止从事 特定职业，剥夺、终止相关资格相关的资格刑。单位方面，增加与限制经营范围和剥 夺单位从事特定行业资质的资格刑。同时，将资格刑的适用范围扩大到所有的环境犯 罪中。最后，在非刑罚性处置措施方面，在《刑法》第37条中增加“必要时，命令被告 人恢复原状，消除影响，限期治理“等类似规定，将这种义务的履行情况作为行为人 悔罪的表现之一，在刑罚的裁量执行时也可以酌情考虑。