对于我国刑法中“多次抢劫”中“抢劫”的犯罪形态,以及“多次抢劫”要件的属性问题,理论和实务界存在诸多争议。从构成要件的特征来看,“多次抢劫”本身只能被视为加重量刑情节,而非构成要件,只存在是否成立的问题,不存在既遂、未遂问题。“多次抢劫”被设置了较高的法定刑,从避免刑罚过重的角度出发,应当对“多次抢劫”进行严格解释,其中的“抢劫”应当是指至少有3次抢劫既遂。立法和司法解释对于“多次抢劫”中“抢劫”的犯罪形态未作规定,司法实务部门针对个案主动进行解释,这种主动解释立法的态度值得肯定。 There are many controversies in the theory and practice circles about the criminal patterns of “multiple robbery” and “robbery” in the criminal law and the property of the “multiple robbery” elements. In terms of the characteristics of the constituent elements, “multiple robbery” itself can only be regarded as an aggravating circumstance rather than an element of constitutional punishment, and there is only the question of whether or not it is established. There is no such thing as an attempt or attempt. “Robbery ” has been set a higher legal punishment, from the perspective of avoiding excessive penalties, should be “robbery ” to be strictly explained, of which “robbery ” should mean at least 3 robberies have been completed. Legislation and judicial interpretation have no provisions on the criminal patterns of “multiple robberies” and “robberies”, and judicial practice departments take the initiative to explain individual cases. This proactive attitude toward legislative interpretation deserves to be affirmed.