不真正不作为犯的边界

不真正不作为犯的边界

Scope of Commission by Omission Crime

    期刊名称：《法学研究》
    期刊年份：
    作者：姚诗
    单位：湖南大学法学院
    中文关键词：不真正不作为犯;保证人;真正不作为犯;结果原因支配说
    英文关键词：commission by omission crime;Garantenstellung;omission crime;Herrschaft &#252ber den Grund des Erfolges
    中文摘要：
    不真正不作为犯在我国的适用虽有不当，但不宜被整体评价为“滥用”。要划定不真正不作为犯的边界，应合理分析其适用的发展方向，从罪名和保证人地位两个维度来探究具体标准。德日两国不真正不作为犯的适用规模迥异，其原因是两国的立法导向和实践倾向不同。以此对比考察我国不真正不作为犯的适用，在罪名上应有所限制，在保证人地位的认定上则应持相对宽松的态度。基于不真正不作为犯与真正不作为犯在适用领域上的“互补”，应将其限制在真正不作为犯所适用罪名的反面，即与个人法益相关的犯罪上。在保证人理论的选择上，结果原因支配说更为合理。先行行为与其他作为义务类型不同，应以刑事政策作为其理论根据，将先行行为排在作为义务体系的最末端，在司法实践中对其做区别对待。
    英文摘要：
    Criminal omissions in China, although occasionally applied improperly, should not be regarded as "over-criminalization". This paper attempts to analyze the development trend of commission by omission crime and investigate its scope in two dimensions, i.e., the kind of commission crime that should include omission, and the identification of Garantenstellung (subject of legal duties). In China, the Criminal Law does not provide for commission by omission crime in its General Provisions, but contains a large number of omission crimes in its Specific Provisions. Besides, judges are prone to impose a lesser or mitigated punishment on commission by omission crime, which is more suitable for meeting increasing challenges of criminal justice in postmodern society. In light of the above fact, China should restrict the application of commission by omission to only some crimes, while adopting a relatively relaxed attitude towards the identification of Garantenstellung. Based on the fact that commission by omission crime is complementary to omission crime, commission by omission should be applied to crimes without these features, i.e., crimes against important individual legal interests. In identifying Garantenstellung, the theory of Herrschaft über den Grund des Erfolges (control over the ground of the infringement of legal interest) is more reasonable in comparison to other relevant theories. Ingerenz (creation of peril), which differs from other types of Garantenstellung, should be justified by criminal policy, rather than the theory of Herrschaft über den Grund des Erfolges. In view of this, Ingerenz should be placed in the second layer of the system of legal duties, hence, be treated differently from other duties in criminal judicial practice.
    全文阅读：  点击下载