不真正不作为犯中的事实支配原理  

The Theory of Factual Dominate of the Crime of Unreal Omission

作　　者：邓毅丞 Deng Yicheng

机构地区：[1]华南师范大学法学院,广东广州510006

出　　处：《湖湘法学评论》2022年第2期91-102,共12页HUXIANG LAW REVIEW

摘　　要：形式论和规范论都不能合理解释不真正不作为犯的处罚根据。与作为犯一样,不真正不作为犯应从事实支配性的角度来理解其正当性。事实支配有抽象、限制、严格以及极端等四个层级。其中,严格的事实支配说是对保证人地位的正确理解。据此,事实支配是指行为人通过设定法益侵害的原因力或者控制力,从而实现对不法状态的支配。具体而言,有危险前行为和事实承担两种类型。同时,故意不作为犯应当受到排他性的限制。关于排他性的判断,以他人介入的客观可能性为判断基准。基于此观念,特定关系人对自杀者的救助义务应做类型化检讨。只有在行为人对自杀者有严格事实支配的场合,才有不真正不作为犯的成立余地。Neither formal theory nor normative theory can reasonably explain the punishment basis of the crime of unreal omission. Like the crime as an act, the crime of unreal omission should be understood from the perspective of factual dominance. There are four levels of factual domination: being abstract,limited, strict and extreme. Among them, strict factual domination theory is the correct understanding of the status of guarantor. According to this point, the domination of facts refers to that the actor controls the illegal state by setting the cause or control of the infringement of legal interests. Specifically, there are two types of previous acts that create dangers and accept the responsibility to protect. At the same time, intentional omission should be restricted by exclusivity. The judgment of exclusivity is based on the objective possibility of others’ intervention. Based on this concept, the obligation of specific people in relationship with the victims who intend to commit suicide should be reviewed on the obligation of help by categorization. Only when the agent has strict factual control over the suicide is it possible to commit the omission of intentional homicide.

关 键 词：不真正不作为犯 事实支配 不救助自杀者 

分 类 号：D924.ll[政治法律—刑法学]