| 英文摘要 |
This article aims to propose a foundational framework for the theory of retribution by employing a unified argumentation model, thus simultaneously justifying both the purpose and legitimacy of punishment, addressing the core concerns of various retribution theories within my country, and integrating these different approaches into a cohesive whole. At the heart of this retribution perspective is the principle that the state must impose punishment in response to criminal acts in a manner that corresponds to their value and is determined by the will of the subject. Theoretically, this necessitates an affirmation of the subjectivity of the individual, a demonstration of the relationship between the state’s obligations and the individual, and an explanation of the rationality behind the correspondence between punishment and crime. This article argues that, as citizens, individuals conceptually recognize themselves in relation to the state and thereby acquire subject status. The freedom of individual subjects can only be realized within the framework of the state; actual freedom depends on an institutionalized behavioral order jointly maintained with other subjects. Therefore, individuals have an obligation to uphold and continue practicing in this free order. When a citizen violates this obligation and, through their behavior, adopts a fundamentally negative stance toward the existing order, it becomes necessary for the state—as the embodiment of the overall legal order—to respond with an equally severe objective measure. Through this“negation of negation,”the universality and validity of the original norm can be reaffirmed. |