构成要件理论的误解与澄清——兼与何秉松、陈兴良等教授商榷  

Misunderstanding and Clarification on Tatbestand Theory

作　　者：潘星丞[1] 

机构地区：[1]华南师范大学法学院

出　　处：《政法论坛》2015年第3期174-182,共9页Tribune of Political Science and Law

基　　金：广东省哲学社会科学"十二五"规划项目"刑事判决书中法理诠释之实证研究"(GD12XFX10)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：四要件与三阶层的论战,暴露出双方对于犯罪论体系核心概念"构成要件"的误解,有必要正本清源。费尔巴哈之构成要件是从日常语义上理解的"可罚条件总和"或罪状,包含主、客观要素;贝林之构成要件是方法论概念,其作为犯罪类型的指导形象,具有连结违法、有责的机能,只包含客观要素;小野对贝林存在误解,但其构成要件作为犯罪类型,也具有方法论意义,是违法有责的法律定型,包含主、客观要素。德、日三阶层迥异;四要件只能与费尔巴哈构成要件相对应。Tatbestand is the core concept of criminal liability system, while there exist serious misunderstandings on it during the academic controversies between four - element and three - stage system. Feuerbach＇ s Tatbestand is only the ordinary meaning of the sum of prerequisites of punishment or definition of a crime, which includes both subjective and objective elements. While the Beling＇ s Tatbestand is a concept of method- ology, serving as the guidance model（Leitbild） of a crime, which can be joined with the unlawfulness and culpability, and consist of only objective elements. Ono - seiichiro misread Beling＇ s theory, but his Tatbestand, serving as the crime category itself and the legal model of unlawfulness and culpability, also possesses methodology function and consists of both subjective and objective factors. There are tremendous distinction between Germany and Japan＇ s three - stage systems, and our country＇ s four - element system can only be seem corresponding to the Tatbestand of Feuerbacb.

关 键 词：犯罪论体系 构成要件 四要件 三阶层 正本清源 

分 类 号：D914[政治法律—刑法学]