不纯正不作为犯因果关系的厘清与重构  

Clarification and Reconstruction of Causality of Derivative Omission Offences

作　　者：张晓媛 Zhang Xiaoyuan

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院

出　　处：《复印报刊资料（刑事法学）》2022年第10期73-85,共13页criminal law

摘　　要：德日刑法理论的“期待说”侧重从规范视角来考察不作为犯的因果关系,虽然值得肯定,但“法所期待行为”与“防果行为”之间存在交叉,对“几近确定”的结果回避可能性的抽象检视不利于法益保护。我国传统理论和司法实践通过作为义务的要求,将不作为犯的因果关系与作为犯同等看待,过于忽视了两者在存在结构上的差异。不作为因果关系以构成要件行为为前提,与作为义务之间具有紧密的关联性。应当从盖然法则或统计法则视角来肯定不作为对于结果的归因性,然后在区分“实行行为意义上的结果回避可能性”和“因果关系意义上的结果回避可能性”的基础之上,结合不同类型的保证人地位和风险降低理论来解决不作为对于结果的归责性。The"expectation theory"put forward by German and Japanese scholars is worthy of affirmation,but there is a crossover between"the expected behavior of law"and"the behavior of preventing consequences".Only examining the"almost certain"possibility of avoiding abstract results is not conducive to the protection of legal interests.In China,the traditional theory and judicial practice treat the causality of derivative omission offences as the same as that of action offences through the requirement of obligation to act,which ignores the structural difference between them.The causality of omission is premised on the behavior of constitutive elements and is closely related to the obligation to act.The attribution of omission to results should be confirmed from the perspective of the rule of probability or statistical rule,and the"possibility of consequence avoidance in the sense of practice"and"possibility of consequence avoidance in the sense of causality"should be distinguished,and the atribution of omission should be properly solved by the theory of risk reduction.

关 键 词：不作为犯 因果关系 期待说 盖然法则 结果回避可能性 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]