论中立帮助行为的处罚边界  

On the Punishment Boundary of Neutral Help Behavior

作　　者：陈洪兵[1] 

机构地区：[1]南京师范大学法学院

出　　处：《中国法学》2017年第1期189-208,共20页China Legal Science

基　　金："江苏高校优势学科建设工程资助项目"的成果之一

摘　　要：传统理论及司法解释一贯认为,只要行为客观上促进了他人的犯罪,行为人主观上也对此明知,就应作为帮助犯受到处罚。这种不加区别的做法可能导致过于限制公民日常生活中的交易、交往自由。近年来,中立的帮助行为原则上不应作为帮助犯受到处罚已经成为国外刑法理论的主流立场。除非行为人违反违禁品管制等相关规定,否则应认为其中立帮助行为并没有制造不被法所容许的危险,不具有帮助行为性,不成立帮助犯。《刑法修正案(九)》针对网络服务提供者责任的规定,并非意味着全面处罚网络中立帮助行为,相反,除非专门用于实施信息网络犯罪,否则,原则上应将提供互联网接入、服务器托管、网络存储、通讯传输、搜索引擎、软件、链接等技术支持的行为排除在刑罚处罚的范围之外。Traditional theory and judicial explanation consider that if the action objectively promotes other people＇s crime, and the actor subjectively knows it, then the actor should be punished as an accessory. This approach may excessively limit citizens＇ trade and communication freedom in daily life. Recent years, the idea that neutral help behavior should not be punished as an accessory in principle is predominant in foreign criminal theory. If the neutral help behavior does not make dangerous affairs not allowed by the law, which does not belong to help behavior, it should be regarded as the accessory, except the situation that the actor violates contraband control and other relevant stipulations. Stipulating the responsibility of network service providers in the Amendment （IX） to the Criminal Law of the People＇s Republic of China do not mean that the help behavior of network service should be comprehensively punished, on the contrary, except the crimes specifically on information network, the actions for technical support such as providing internet access, server trusteeship, network storage, communication transmission, search engine, software, interlinkage are excluded from the criminal punishment.

关 键 词：中立帮助行为 帮助犯 利益衡量 正当业务行为 网络犯罪 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]