间接正犯概念演变及其情境  

Evolution of Indirect Guilt's Definition and Background

作　　者：李仲民[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院,重庆400031

出　　处：《重庆理工大学学报（社会科学）》2014年第11期82-90,共9页Journal of Chongqing University of Technology（Social Science）

基　　金：国家社会科学基金(11BFX104)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：初始,间接正犯系正犯·共犯分离体系下,限制正犯概念在共犯极端从属性说处罚遗漏现象下的直白描述,仅具名称。而后,共犯限制从属性说通行,间接正犯的外延仍旧扩张,其内涵飘忽不定。刑法理论自觉从"正犯性"定义间接正犯,在犯罪事实支配理论对其内涵的阐释下,间接正犯从直指现象的名称成为内涵丰富的概念。其演变的背后反映了刑法理论的变迁——共犯从属程度从极端从属性说到限制从属性说;正犯·共犯区分基准从形式客观说到犯罪事实支配说;共犯处罚根据从责任共犯论到因果共犯论;刑法理论从形式观转向实质观。纵然包括间接正犯概念在内的刑法理论转向实质性,但其形式性无法亦不应被湮没,刑法理论必须承认并安置必要的实质性元素,以寻求二者平衡,并维系自身合理性。At first,indirect guilt is a strict description without actual meaning,which is to restrict the extremely subordination of direct guilt,so as to avoid omission,under the system of departure of direct guilt and accomplice. As the theory of direct guilt restriction＇s omission prevailed,the connotation and extension of indirect guilt＇s definition still kept vague. Based on recent influential theory of criminal fact dominance,the criminal law gave the definition to indirect guilt from the point of view of direct guilt consciously,then,the definition of indirect guilt reached the new one which has an ample connotation. The improvement reflects the evolution of criminal law theory——from extremely subordination of direct guilt to restricted subordination one. The difference of direct and indirect guilt has been explained by the theory of criminal fact dominance,instead of traditional theory of formal objection,and the accomplice punishment basis has shifted from the theory of duty to that of cause and effect; criminal law theory has turned from formalism to realism. Though the criminal law theory has turned to realism,including the definition of indirect guilt,the formalism of it shouldn＇t and couldn＇t been ignored,thus,realism and formalism have the possibility to find the balance and self-reasonability.

关 键 词：间接正犯 共犯 概念 演变 

分 类 号：D914[政治法律—刑法学]