作者查詢 / humbler
作者 humbler 在 PTT [ Examination ] 看板的留言(推文), 共75則
限定看板:Examination
看板排序:
全部PACERS6844NBA5821PHX-Suns3766Stock3737C_Chat2772home-sale1474Gossiping1206Celtics410Orl-Magic316Baseball215car200AC_In175LightNovel167watch136marvel135UTAH-JAZZ114Examination75StupidClown59Kings51Lawyer42BLAZERS36sex33Hornets29cookclub24lesbian24Finance23Eng-Class21Pistons21CATCH19Hawks19Wizards19GL18Mavericks15Grizzlies14Suit_Style14Wine14Lakers12Thunder11TigerBlue11ChicagoBulls10PokeMon10Raptors10joke9Buddhism8Food8Kaohsiung8Knicks8Tech_Job8CFP7Coffee7FJU7LaClippers7Nets7Nurse7Salary7Spurs7AllTogether6Boy-Girl6CarShop6ChungLi6hair_loss6MAC6MiamiHeat6Tainan6Crystal5FITNESS5Fund5H-GAME5HatePolitics5Japan_Travel5Nuggets5poem5basketball4Bucks4Cavaliers4feminine_sex4Hsinchu4Jeremy_Lin4MobileComm4Pelicans4shoes4study4trumpet4ChineseMed3KS98-3023MacShop3nb-shopping3optical3toberich3Anti-Fake2basketballTW2Beauty2Chiayi2Comic2DC2graduate2Law-Service2LeBronJames2Loan2Mancare2Rockets2Sixers2soho2street_style2TOEIC2YOLO2ACG_SNS1AngelPray1BBSmovie1creditcard1EuropeanCar1G-S-WARRIORS1Garena1gay1Hate1HoneyClover1iOS1japanavgirls1JasonKidd1Jeans1KMT1kodomo1L_HappyLivin1L_TalkandCha1Language1LTK1Miaoli1Mix_Match1NARUTO1Old-Games1PingTung1pts1seiyuu1Self-Healing1Shu-Lin1Suckcomic1TakahashiRie1Teacher1TPC_Police1TWproducts1TypeMoon1TyrekeEvans1WorkinChina1worldtrigger1Yabuki1Yunlin1<< 收起看板(146)
6F推:有判決書嗎?記者寫得不可信07/21 15:49
1F推:以上甲都無罪1無教唆雙重故意2教唆須對特定對象為之307/20 21:22
2F→:甲無教唆的雙重故意,理由同上07/20 21:22
3F→:教唆犯無過失犯也無原因自由行為07/20 21:24
5F→:無意識當然沒有教唆故意,故無罪07/20 22:06
18F→:教唆犯要和行為人有心理聯絡,原因自由行為已陷於無自主意07/21 10:41
19F→:思,難以想像有心理聯絡,前行為階段更不可能07/21 10:42
24F推:前置理論這樣解釋亦可,但會破壞教唆犯的要件07/21 11:30
25F→:有擴大刑罰範圍之疑07/21 11:31
26F→:甲無罪,如我前面所述,教唆行為時要與行為人有心理上連絡07/21 21:26
27F→:題目說甲無意識在乙面前教唆,但這非刑法上的教唆07/21 21:27
1F推:乙能主張緊急避難,但對乙的緊急辦難,丙仍能主張正當防衛07/20 21:27
2F→:第三題對丙來說是誤想防衛的問題07/20 21:31
4F推:因為債權平等原則,鼓勵一物二賣07/07 12:18
2F推:我也自修,只看林俊益04/28 09:35
4F推:基礎要打好的話,陳計男老師可參考04/19 16:34
3F推:以文字為準,最高法院的見解02/24 09:26
1F→:幾付遲延和如甲為商人請求權127逾時效02/19 21:14
5F→:不可解除契約,但有225第二項代償請求權02/17 23:04
8F→:如可任意解約有違誠信原則02/18 02:18
9F→:惟實務於此情形認為可依情事變更予債權人解除權02/18 02:19
10F推:債務人如願意,當然也可合意解除02/18 02:23
11F→:建議可翻閱林誠二老師的書,有詳細解釋02/18 02:26
8F推:因我國對瑕疵物無債務不屢行之責任02/15 14:21
9F→:故用物之瑕疵擔保責任補充,兩者為權利競合02/15 14:29