也谈“被教唆的人没有犯被教唆的罪”——基于共犯从属性的本土化改造  

The Interpretation of “the Instigated Person has not Committed the Instigated Crime”——Based on the Indigenization of Accomplice Subordination Principle

作　　者：肖鹏 XIAO Peng(Beijing Institute of Technology Law School)

机构地区：[1]北京理工大学法学院

出　　处：《法学家》2022年第6期141-155,195,共16页The Jurist

摘　　要：我国立法没有笼统地采用区分制或者单一正犯体系,两种学说均有存在的空间。区分制并不完美,但和单一正犯体系相比具有相对的理论优势。我国刑法总则中存在处罚预备犯的规定,故不应当照搬实行从属性的结论,而应当将共犯从属性相应地理解为预备从属性。“被教唆的人没有犯被教唆的罪”是指被教唆者已经实施预备行为但尚未着手的情形。“被教唆者已预备未着手说”和单一正犯体系相比,不会造成处罚的不协调,和“被教唆者已着手未既遂说”相比,不会使《刑法》第29条第2款沦为注意规定,并能够妥当地处理相关理论问题。Neither the dual system nor the unitary principle-offender system is directly supported by China’s Criminal Code, which means both theories can exist in China’s legal system. The principle and accomplice dividing system is not perfect, but it’s better than the unitary principle offender system. There is a provision to punish preparatory act in China’s Criminal Code. As a result, the accomplice-subordination theory should be interpreted as the subordination of preparatory theory. “ The instigated person has not committed the instigated crime” means the instigated person has committed the preparatory act but not yet the perpetrating act. This interpretation scheme would neither cause punishing discoordination nor make the Article 29, Section 2 of Criminal Code a provision for attention. In addition, this interpretation scheme is able to deal with relative theoretical problems.

关 键 词：教唆犯 预备犯 共犯从属性 单一正犯体系 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]