摘要： 正当防卫是公民行使防卫权的行为，刑法对此加以保护。我国刑法第20条第1款明文规定正当防卫不负刑事责任。在司法实践中，如何正确划分正当防卫与防卫过当以及一般犯罪之间的界限，是一个较为复杂的问题。于欢故意伤害案一审判决未能认定正当防卫，甚至防卫过当也未予认定，而是按照一般的故意伤害罪判处无期徒刑。该案经媒体披露以后，引起社会公众的广泛关注，同时也引发了刑法学界对于正当防卫制度的反思与检讨。以于欢故意伤害案的一审判决为例，从案件事实和法律适用等方面对正当防卫进行刑法教义学分析，并对司法实践中存在的对于正当防卫的认识误区进行反思，具有重要意义。在于欢故意伤害案的二审判决中，认定本案具有防卫情节，同时认为于欢的正当防卫超过了正当防卫的必要限度。二审判决虽然比一审判决在防卫情节的认定上有所进步，但仍然未能正确区分正当防卫与防卫过当的界限。

关键词: 正当防卫, 防卫过当, 无过当防卫

Abstract: Justified defense is the action taken by ordinary citizens to defense their rights, which is protected by criminal law.Article 20, para 1 of Criminal Law provides that there should be no criminal liability for justified defense.In judicial practice, it is quite complex to differentiate justified defense, excessive defense and ordinary crime.The judgement of the first instance trial of Yu Huan Case did not accept the justified defense and even rejected the excessive defense, based on which Yu Huan was sentenced to life imprisonment.After being reported by the media, Yu Huan Case attracted the attention from the general public and also triggered the reflection and discussions of criminal law scholars.This article makes doctrinal analysis of justified defense from the perspectives of fact and law and reflects the misunderstanding of Chinese judiciary on the issue of justified defense by referring to the judgement of the first instance trial of Yu Huan Case.The judgement of the second instance trial of Yu Huan Case concluded that the defense of Yu Huan was excessive.Though the judgement of the second instance trial is better than the first judgement in term of the circumstances of justified defense, it still failed to distinguish the justified defense and excessive defense.

Key words: Justified Defense, Excessive Defense, Defense without Limitation