区分制与单一制:共犯教义学的学术站位  

The Differentiation System and the Unitary System: The Academic Position of Accomplice in Theology

作　　者：陈兴良[1] CHEN Xingliang

机构地区：[1]北京大学

出　　处：《上海政法学院学报（法治论丛）》2022年第6期1-13,共13页Journal of Shanghai University of Political Science & Law(The Rule of Law Forum)

摘　　要：在共犯教义学中,区分制与单一制的选择是一个前提性的重大问题,对此的不同选择决定了共犯理论的不同类型。德日刑法教义学的传统强调正犯与共犯的区分,此后,随着共犯独立性在立法上的强化,单一制出现并形成对区分制的挑战,因而在共犯教义学中形成了区分制与单一制的对峙。在我国刑法学界,同样存在区分制与单一制的不同学术立场,两者的论争在一定程度上推动了我国共犯教义学的发展。对于区分制与单一制,应当在厘清各自的学术立场的基础上,对不同的观点加以辨析,由此形成学者对区分制与单一制的各自学术站位。In the theology of accomplice, the choice between differentiation and unitary is a major precondition, and the different choices determine the different types of accomplice theory. The tradition of German-Japanese criminal law theology underlines the distinction between the perpetrator and the accomplice, and since then, with the legislative strengthening of the independence of the accomplice, the unitary system has emerged and gradually formed a prominent challenge to the differentiation system. Thus,the confrontation is shaped between the differentiation system and the unitary system in the theology of accomplice. In the field of Chinese criminal law theory, above-mentioned different academic positions also exist, and the controversy between these two systems has promoted the development of the theology of accomplice in China to a certain extent. For the differentiation system and the unitary system, on the basis of clarifying their respective academic positions, different viewpoints should be analyzed, so as the respective academic positions of different scholars can be eventually established.

关 键 词：共犯教义学 区分制 单一制 共犯理论 正犯 

分 类 号：DF611[政治法律—刑法学]