刑法同類解釋規則：一個方法論上的確立

The Ejusdem Generis Rules of Criminal Law: A Methodological Establishment

同類解釋規則濫觴於英美法系的法律解釋體系，20世紀80年代引入我國刑事法學領域後受到學界關注。刑法同類解釋規則在我國大致經歷了“有實無名”、初始關注、本土起始、研究深入四個階段，但也存在體系化、本體論、規範論等方面的研究不足。將刑法同類解釋規則用於對特定詞語的分析、對加重犯或加重情節的認定以及對不同罪名之間的區分性認定，是刑法同類解釋規則研究中的三個認識誤區。應將刑法同類解釋規則的適用場合（條件）限定於同一刑法條文內部、能够從同一刑法條文內部列舉的事項歸納出“同類”要素，並與寬泛意義上的同類解釋、同一解釋、同類性質解釋等相區分。從體系定位來看，刑法同類解釋規則是刑法體系解釋的下位概念，其運用是一個多種解釋方法融合的過程。從基本屬性來看，刑法同類解釋規則是一項中性的法律解釋規則，該規則本身並不具有限制或者擴張的價值屬性，也沒有嚴格限定的主體要求。從價值導向來看，刑法同類解釋規則有助於罪刑法定原則在司法層面的實現，其操作過程運用的類比方法，既是法律推理中邏輯關係的彰顯，也維護了邏輯對推理過程的約束力，其遵循的同等對待原則和正義理念，則是對刑法平等這一基本原則的堅守和維護，確保了刑法解釋結論的實質合理性和正當性。

The witness testfying in court is the basic requirement of the modern criminal system, especially in the case of confrontation litigation the prosecution and the defense lead evidence investigation, which requires the witness to appear in court to carry out the court investigation effectively. In the litigation structure that emphasizes the appearance of a witness in order to carry out the hearsay evidence rule or the principle of direct verbal speech, the method of human evidence not only reflects the evidence of the words, but also reflects the important role of the witness investigation. Although it is of great significance for the witness to appear in order to achieve the basic objectives of the criminal procedure law, it does not mean that all witnesses in the criminal proceedings must appear in the court. Only if there is any doubt or controversy advanced by the prosecution and the defense in the testimony provided by witness, it is necessary to ask the witness to appear before the question is clear. Although the reform of making criminal trials substantive, to some extent, prompts the appearing in court of The ejusdem generis rules originated from the legal interpretation system of Anglo American legal system, and attracted the attention of the academic community after they were introduced into the field of criminal law in China in the 1980s. The ejusdem generis rules of criminal law in China have roughly gone through four stages: real and unknown, initial concern, local initiation, and in-depth research. However, there are also deficiencies in the study of systematization, ontology, and standardization. It is a misunderstanding in the study of ejusdem generis rules of criminal law to use the rules to analyze specific words, to identify aggravated crimes or aggravating circumstances, and to distinguish between different crimes. The application occasions (conditions) of the ejusdem generis rules of criminal law should be limited to the same criminal law provisions, and "similar" elements can be summarized from the matters listed in the same criminal law provisions, and distinguished from the same interpretation, the same interpretation, and the same nature interpretation in a broad sense. From the perspective of system positioning, the ejusdem generis rules of criminal law are the lower concept of the interpretation of criminal law system, and their application is a process of integration of multiple interpretation methods. From the perspective of basic attributes, the ejusdem generis rules of criminal law is a neutral rule of legal interpretation. The rule itself does not have the value attribute of limitation or expansion, nor does it have the subject requirement of strict limitation. From the perspective of value orientation, the ejusdem generis rules of criminal law contribute to the realization of the principle of a legally prescribed punishment for a specified crime at the judicial level. The analogy method used in the operation process not only highlights the logical relationship in legal reasoning, but also maintains the binding force of logic on the reasoning process. The principle of equal treatment and the concept of justice it follows are the adherence to and maintenance of the basic principle of equality in criminal law. It ensures the substantial rationality and legitimacy of the conclusion of criminal law interpretation.