论故意法定犯中的容许风险——兼论非法行医罪的行为不法与结果归责  

The Permitted Risk in the Intentional Administrative Crimes and the Act's Wrongfulness and Imputation of Outcome in the Article 336

作　　者：李昱 LI Yu

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院

出　　处：《中国政法大学学报》2024年第1期277-293,共17页Journal Of CUPL

基　　金：清华大学自主科研计划文科专项课题“网络时代刑法理论的体系性创新”(项目批准号:2019THZWLJ04)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：容许风险理论不仅适用于过失犯的不法,它与故意法定犯的不法构造也具备兼容性。容许风险在故意法定犯中的功能在于排除构成要件行为不法。这一功能定位使其具备双重功效:其一,触发故意法定犯中结果避免可能性的判断,实质化故意法定犯的结果归责;其二,有效区分故意法定犯中的行政违法与刑事不法。应当在非法行医罪中运用容许风险理论,一方面将部分异地行医等案件中单纯违反行政法规的行为排除出刑事不法的范围;另一方面防止仅以条件关系认定死亡结果与非法行医行为之间的归责关联。The permitted-risk theory is not only applicable to the wrongfulness of negligent crimes,but also compatible with the construction of intentional administrative crimes in China's criminal law.The function of permitted-risk in administrative crimes is to exclude the constituent element of wrongdoing.This function makes it have dual effects at the same time:first,it triggers the judgment of the possibility of avoiding the outcome in intentional administrative crimes,and substantiates the imputation of the outcome of intentional administrative crimes;Second,it effectively distinguishes between administrative violations and criminal wrongfulness in intentional administrative crimes.The permitted-risk theory is supposed to be applied to the crime of illegal medical practice.On the one hand,the pure violation of administrative regulations in some cases such as practicing medicine in different places should be excluded from the scope of penalty;On the other hand,it should prevent the causality between the death of the patients and the illegal practice of medicine based solely on the conditional relationship.

关 键 词：容许风险 过失犯 法定犯 非法行医罪 行刑交叉 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]