共犯教义学中的德日经验与中国现实——正犯与主犯教义学功能厘清下的思考

发布时间：2018-04-30 07:05

本文选题：正犯 + 限制正犯　；参考：《法律科学(西北政法大学学报)》2017年05期

【摘要】：正犯概念之教义学功能在于解决犯罪参与者构成要件符合性之问题,主犯概念的教义学功能则在于量刑,我国关于共犯之刑事立法具有多重解释的空间,单一制抑或区分制的解释结论都不违背现行立法;以重要作用说与行为支配论为代表之当今德日学理上正犯概念的实质化倾向,使得正犯概念的教义学功能发生了异化,不仅面临体系内部逻辑自洽的难题,亦暴露出以德日为代表的区分制立法模式之弊端;在限制正犯概念立场下,通过对正犯进行形式化之解读,建构正犯、主犯分离体系,不仅合乎现行立法之规定,亦可确保正犯、主犯各自之教义学功能的独立。
[Abstract]:The doctrinal function of the concept of principal offender is to solve the problem of conformance of the constituent elements of the criminal participant, the dogmatic function of the concept of principal offender lies in sentencing, the criminal legislation of our country about accomplice has the space of multiple interpretations. The interpretation conclusion of single system or differentiation system is not contrary to the current legislation, and the substantive tendency of the concept of principal crime in Germany and Japan, represented by the theory of important role and the theory of behavior domination, has resulted in the alienation of the doctrinal function of the concept of principal offender. It not only faces the problem of logical self-consistency within the system, but also exposes the malpractice of the differentiated legislative model represented by Germany and Japan. Under the position of limiting the concept of principal offender, it constructs the separation system of principal offender and principal offender by formalizing the interpretation of principal offender. It not only conforms to the existing legislation, but also ensures the independence of the dogmatic function of the principal offender and the principal offender.
【作者单位】：海南大学法学院;
【分类号】：D924.1

【相似文献】