雇佣犯罪是一种古老的犯罪形式，近年来频繁发生。严格说来，雇佣犯罪并不是一个专门的刑法术语，刑法学界对雇佣犯罪的研究尚不够成熟，而对雇佣犯罪死刑适用的研究更是一片空白。笔者尝试性地探讨雇佣犯罪死刑适用的若干问题，以资学理完善。李长河雇凶案是雇佣犯罪中社会影响较大的案件，也是雇佣犯罪中较为典型的案件，其引发了诸多的理论和实践问题具有很大的探讨价值和现实意义，但至今未有任何文章深入研究论及过，因而很有对其进行个案法理研究的必要。李长河雇凶伤害案的判决定罪基本准确，五名被告人都应判故意伤害罪，但也有不妥之处：雇主李长河和中间人鲁耀民、田兴民应是故意伤害（致人重伤），而不同于受雇人刘国兴、依志宏是故意伤害（致人死亡）。量刑上，本案死刑适用存在两大问题：一是判决量刑过重，李长河罪不足以致死，鲁耀民、田兴民判处死缓也过重；二是判决死刑人数过多，一人被害判处三名罪犯死刑、两名罪犯死缓。结合案情及法理,笔者认为本案属于实行过限，李长河不应对致被害人钟松琴之死的行为及其后果负责。笔者认为李长河死刑立即执行的判决过重。我国刑法在总则中，对死刑的适用规定了比较严格的标准，死刑只适用于罪行极其严重的犯罪分子。罪行极其严重是主客观方面的统一，在适用死刑时，主观恶性和客观危害缺一不可。故意伤害罪可能适用死刑的两种情况是故意伤害致人死亡和故意伤害致人重伤。故意伤害致人重伤要适用死刑必须具备三个条件：手段特别残忍、致人重伤和造成严重残疾。笔者认为判处李长河死刑立即执行并不合理，结合案情主要表现在：一是李长河所犯的罪行不符合刑法总则中死刑适用的标准；二是李长河的犯罪行为并不符合故意伤害罪中死刑适用的标准。本案中李长河罪不足以致死，且总体上看本案雇佣犯罪判决死刑人数过多。导致判决多人死刑的原因是多方面的，既有内部因素也有外部因素。内部因素在于雇佣犯罪案件本身的特点：有预谋性的共同犯罪，分工周密，涉案人数众多；手段一般较为恶劣；本身较为复杂。外部因素（社会环境因素）主要有新闻媒体、民愤、领导批示、被告人身份等。最后，笔者探讨了限制雇凶犯罪死刑适用之理论依据并提出一些粗浅的解决构想。限制雇凶犯罪死刑适用的理由有两点：一是雇佣犯罪死刑适用过多有违报应主义这一死刑的理论基础；二是从刑事政策的角度考虑，雇佣犯罪适用死刑过多也不符合“宽严相济”的刑事政策。限制雇凶犯罪死刑适用既要从司法审判进行内部制约，也要从社会外部环境入手，对这一问题的构想主要有几点：1.从司法审判角度进行内部制约。（1）严格区分主从犯，死刑应仅限于雇佣犯罪中的主犯；（2）即使主犯有数人也不能都适用死刑；（3）树立“少杀慎杀”思想，严格限制雇佣犯罪中适用死刑的犯罪类型；（4）从刑罚理论角度考虑，可适用死缓的，慎用“死刑立即执行”。2.改变外部环境，对雇佣犯罪死刑适用进行外部制约，减少媒体、民愤、党政批示、被告人身份等不利因素对案件公正审判的影响。

Employment offence is an ancient criminal form taking place. Strictly, employment offence is not a special criminal law term，so sufficient researching on the death penalty of employment offence have not been acquired. The author will try her best to inquire into the theory of the death penalty of employment offence to promote the development and perfection of criminal jurisprudence theory.Li Changhe employment offence is a case which has great society influence and is also a typical model of employment offence case, it caused many theories and practice problem so it has study value and reality meaning, but up to now have never had any article research in this case , so it's necessary to carry legal theory research on this individual case.The verdict sentence of the case of Li Changhe employment offence is basically accurate, Five accused person should be judged intentionally injury. But also have unsatisfactory questions. Employer Li Changhe and agent Lu Yaoming is intentionally injury(with the result that person's severely wounded), but differ from the payroll person, Liu Guoxing , Yi Zhihong who are intentionally injury(with the result that person is death).On the criminal sentence, this case death penalty apply exist two greatest problems: First, criminal sentence is over-weigh, Li Changhe can not be sentenced to death, Lu Yaoming and Tian Xingming can not be sentenced to reprieve.;Second, is that the verdict death penalty number is excessive, one person kill to penalize three criminal death penalty, two criminal reprieve. Combining details of case and legal theory, the writer thought this case to belong to surplus behavior, Li Changhe shouldn't be responsible for the behavior and result of dead of the victim Zhong Songqing. The writer think the verdict of the death penalty of Li Changhe is over-weight. Our penal code applied death penalty provision stricter in totally of standard, death penalty be applicable to criminal acting very severity of crime member. The very severity criminal acts is unifying subject and object view, while apply death penalty, subjective malignant with objective endanger can't lack any. Intentional injury may apply death penalty have two kinds of circumstance : intentionally injury with the result that person death and intentionally injury with the result that person's severely wounded. Intentional injury with the result that person's severely wounded want to apply death penalty have three conditions :The means is special and cruel, with the result that person severely wounded and with result in severity disable and sick.The writer think to penalize Li ChangHe death penalty is not reasonable, combining details of case mainly perform at: While being the criminal acts that Li Changhe is not agree with the death penalty standard of the general penal code;Second ,is Li Changhe's criminal offence is not agree with to match the death penalty in the injury to intentionally apply of standard.In this case Li Changhe can not be sentence to death,, and this employ crime verdict death penalty number is excessive. The reason why verdict many person death penalty is various, have inner factors and exterior factors. The inner part factors lie in the characteristics of employ crime case: Premeditated common crime, division of labor careful and attentive, be involved a number members; the inferior evil means ,complications. The exterior factor (social milieu factor) is main to have news medium, people's anger, leadership batch to show, accused human body etc.In the end, writer study the basis theories of restriction the death penalty of employment crime , and put forward some superficially solve speculation. The restriction employ crime death penalty have two reasons: First, to apply excessive death penalty of employment crime is against retribution doctrine which is the theory foundation of death penalty; Second, to apply excessive death penalty of employ crime also not agree with a pertaining to the criminal policy of temper justice with mercy. The restriction death penalty of employ crime must check the inner part of judicatory judgment supervision, also must from the exterior environment commence of society, the speculation of this problem is:1.The judgment carry on the judicatory inner check and supervision.(1)Strict distinct master from servant , death penalty should only be applied to principal offender of employ crime ; (2)Though the principal offender is several persons, we can't all apply death penalty, either;(3)Set up "little kill and carefully kill" thought, strictly restrict the crime type of applying death penalty in the employ crime;(4)From the consideration of the penalty theories, if it can apply reprieve, carefully use "death penalty summary execution";2.Change exterior environment, apply to carry on an exterior check and supervision towards employment crime death penalty, decrease the disadvantageous influence of the factor of the case be fair judgment such as medium, people's anger, political batch show, accused human body etc.