故意犯与过失犯的客观归责——德国刑法中客观归责理论对我国的借鉴

发布时间：2018-12-11 13:13

【摘要】：故意被认为是对实现构成要件的知与欲,行为人必须认识到客观上有实现构成要件可能的事实,即有可能侵害法益的风险。如果行为人所认识的事实不是客观上可能实现构成要件的事实,故意就不成立。否定客观构成要件,即否定了故意,客观归责理论使得故意犯认定的重心移转到客观构成要件上。针对过失责任,客观归责论提出较有体系的限制标准。违反注意义务在传统过失理论当中是和过失划上等号的概念。相对于注意义务的违反,客观归责理论有较详细的具体内容,且其提出有说服力的标准,有助于一般人清楚理解构成要件要素的内涵。注意义务这个用语在法律上不明确,如果以客观归责的内容作为判断标准,将能清楚表达过失犯的意义。
[Abstract]:Intentional is regarded as the knowledge and desire to realize the constitutive elements. The actor must recognize the fact that there is the possibility of realizing the constitutive elements objectively, that is, the risk of possibly infringing on the legal interests. If the facts recognized by the perpetrator are not objectively possible to achieve the facts of the constitutive elements, intentionally does not hold. The theory of objective imputation makes the center of gravity of intentional offense shift to objective constitutive elements. In view of fault liability, objective imputation theory puts forward more systematic limitation standard. Breach of duty of care is the concept of equating negligence with negligence in the traditional negligence theory. Compared with the breach of duty of care, objective imputation theory has more detailed contents, and it puts forward persuasive standards, which is helpful for the general people to understand clearly the connotation of the elements of constitutive elements. The term "duty of care" is not clear in law. If the content of objective imputation is taken as the criterion of judgment, the meaning of negligent offender can be clearly expressed.
【作者单位】：北京航空航天大学法学院;
【分类号】：D951.6;D924.1

【相似文献】