| 摘要:（摘要内容经过系统自动伪原创处理以避免复制，俄语论文网站，下载原文正常，内容请直接查看目录。） 本文彩用汗青和比拟的办法，俄语论文网站，同时兼有归纳、归结、援用、举例、列表等详细办法的综合运用，以科罚人性化为视角略论了中俄两国的褫夺自在刑立法，旨在加速我国科罚人性化方法。论文构造上划分为媒介、注释和结论三部门。媒介简略回想了中苏刑法成长史，并剖析了我国以后对俄科罚研究范畴的学术现状。继而指出比拟两国褫夺自在刑的启事和此项研究的价值和意义之地点。注释是全文的中间部门，分为四部门第一部门为概述。在扼要解释自在刑情形的基本上引见了各个汗青时代的俄罗斯褫夺自在刑立法概略，并联合刑法实际剖析了俄联邦科罚人性化的表示和成因。第二部门为毕生褫夺自在刑比拟。从汗青剖析动手指出两者在各自科罚系统中的位置，继而论述了俄联邦毕生褫夺自在在实用规模和实用对象上小于我国无期徒刑的缘由，和假释方面我国科罚人性化更深的来由，还剖析了服法场所相干方面的异同。第三部门为有期褫夺自在刑比拟。以刑期的比拟作为切入点，同时统筹免去科罚的办法(假释和弛刑)和其替换感化和服法场所几个方面作了综合比拟，并剖析了两国科罚各自人性化的表现。第四部门为短时间褫夺自在刑比拟。在总的剖析短时间自在刑利害的基本上，分离从立法形式、实用规模、科罚替换感化、服法场所、服刑处遇五个方面比拟了我国的拘役和俄联邦的拘禁，并指出可以互相自创的地方。总之，笔者是以科罚人性化作为比拟的尺度，通篇贯串了保证人权这一科罚理念，在此基本大将中俄两国褫夺自在刑加以比拟剖析。结论部门指出俄联邦现行刑法典是一部充足表现科罚人性化的立法文献，有关褫夺自在刑的相干立律例定渗入渗出着立法者的人性主义关心情结，但对其立法自创应该容身我国国情，不克不及自觉照搬。 Abstract: The comprehensive application of the color with the history and comparison methods, with both inductive, attributed, to cite, for example, lists the detailed measures and to punish humanity of is studied from the perspective of the Sino Russian enteignis criminal legislation, aimed at accelerating humanized measures of punishment in our country. The structure is divided into three departments, media comments and conclusions. Remember the media brief history of Sino Soviet criminal law, and analyzes the current situation of academic research field after Russia punishment. Then pointed out that the two match or free punishment of reason and the research significance and the value of the place. The annotation is the middle sector, divided into four parts. The first part is an overview. In the brief explanation of freedom punishment on the basis of introduction the different historical era Russian enteignis punishment legislation briefly, and joint criminal law theoretical analysis of representation and causes of Russian Federation penwoulsternativey humanization. The second sector is the deprivation of freedom than life. From a historical analysis that both in their system of punishment is in position, and then discusses the Russian Federation lifelong enteignis in utility scale and practical object is less than China's reasons for imprisonment, and parole on our punishment humanized deeper reason, also analyzes the differences in Fachang suit the coherent. The third sector is a period of deprivation of freedom match. To sentence analogy as a starting point. At the same time as a whole penwoulsternativey removed (parole and chi square) and replace action kimono Fachang several aspects were comprehensively compared, and analyzes the two penwoulsternativey their human performance. The fourth sector for a short period of time the deprivation of freedom match. In the total analysis of short time free of penalty interest basically isolated from the legislative form, the utility scale and penwoulsternativey substitution effect, dosage, and served at five aspects compared China's detention and the Russian Federal detention, and pointed out each other internally generated. In a word, the paper is based on humanized penalty as compared to the scale of the, throughout persisted through the guarantee the concept of punishment of human rights, on this basic general of the Sino Russian bilateral enteignis punishment be comparative analysis. The conclusion pointed out that the Russian Federal penal code is a sufficient performance penalty humanistic literature of legislation, relevant enteignis punishment of coherent vertical statutes fixed infiltration of the legislator's humanitarian concern complex, but the legislation created should shelter conditions of our country, means less than self Jue Zhaoban. 目录: 前言 6-8 一、概述 8-14 二、终身剥夺自由刑比较 14-23 (一) 历史沿革方面 14-15 (二) 适用范围方面 15-17 (三) 适用对象方面 17-18 (四) 免除刑罚方面 18-21 (五) 服刑场所方面 21-23 三、有期剥夺自由刑比较 23-33 (一) 刑罚期限方面 23-27 (二) 免除刑罚方面 27-30 (三) 替代影响方面 30-31 (四) 服刑场所方面 31-33 四、短期剥夺自由刑比较 33-40 (一) 立法模式方面 34-35 (二) 适用范围方面 35-36 (三) 替代影响方面 36-37 (四) 服刑场所方面 37-38 (五) 服刑处遇方面 38-40 结论 40-41 参考文献 41-44 后记 44 |
