结果预见义务与结果回避义务之刑法地位探析  

Criminal Law Position for Foresighted Result Obligation and Result Avoidance Obligation

作　　者：刘毅 刘宗武 

机构地区：[1]吉安市人民检察院,江西吉安343000 [2]佛山市高明区人民检察院,广东佛山528500

出　　处：《哈尔滨学院学报》2017年第2期47-51,共5页Journal of Harbin University

摘　　要：重视结果预见义务的旧过失论和修正的旧过失论主张以"预"代"避",重视结果回避义务的新过失论和超新过失论分别主张以"避"含"预"和以"避"代"预",其对结果预见义务与结果回避义务之刑法地位的认识都是值得商榷的。两者在注意义务乃至过失论中实则应居同等重要的地位,不能只将两项义务之一作为注意义务的核心,因两者在认定不同的过失犯罪中都具有独立的价值。The old theory of fault and the revised one of foresighted result obligation argues for ＂foresight＂ instead of ＂avoidance＂. The new fault theory of result avoidance obli- gation argues that ＂avoidance＂ contains ＂foresight＂ while the latest fault theory argues for using ＂avoidance＂ instead of ＂foresight＂. The ideas about criminal law position in those theories are arguable. They have equal position in obligation theory as well as fault theories so it is not right to take one of them as the focus. They have independent value for identification of various faults.

关 键 词：结果预见义务 结果回避义务 刑法地位 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]