共同犯罪归责的社会功能进路——以京特·雅各布斯的共同犯罪理论为切入点  

The Social Functional Approach to the Imputation of Complicity--Taking Günther Jakobs’s Complicity Theory as the Entry Point

作　　者：王志坤 Wang Zhikun

机构地区：[1]北京市人民检察院法律政策研究室

出　　处：《环球法律评论》2024年第5期173-190,共18页Global Law Review

摘　　要：共同犯罪理论当前走到了历史性十字路口,超越歧见、走出迷宫,有必要运用一种社会功能的分析进路,从以义务为中心的统一理论出发,分析共同犯罪人的内部规范结构。共同犯罪的归责应当采取实质的犯罪概念,坚持构成要件不法这个归责前提,并立足违反负担的弱义务状态,将共犯人的从属性贯彻到底。鉴于社会分工将共同犯罪人连结在一起,在归责时应当努力探求社会交往的通常意义。将构成要件实现归属于每一个共同犯罪人,不取决于共同犯罪人自己的欲求,而应参照不容许风险的认定方式进行客观归责;相应地,要摒弃以自然主义的因果关系为主的认定方式。在归责之内不做质的区分,在量刑层面上区分贡献的分量,揭示出共同犯罪形态是开放的而非闭锁的,这也契合主流的双层区分制理论。Currently,China's theory of complicity has reached a historic crossroads.To move beyond disagreements and out of the maze,it is necessary to employ an analytical approach based on social function.We should analyze the internal normative structure of complicity by taking a unified obligation-centered theory as the starting point.Multiple people completing a task is a common social phenomenon,and complicity is just one form of it.Therefore,in the imputation of complicity,it is necessary to connect it with other social phenomena.The German jurist Günther Jakobs proposed a unified theory of criminal imputation based on social function,which has significant implications for the study of complicity in China.The social function of the system of complicity as a form of criminal imputation is to define the boundaries of the imputation of participants(including the principal and the accomplice),guide people's behavior,confirm the validity of norms,and ensure the survival of society.In the imputation of complicity,we should adopt a concept of substantive offense,adhere to the premise of imputation that wrongness required by an offense is fulfilled,and take the incidental obligation as the basis,so as to thoroughly implement the principle of subordination of accomplices.The realization of the elements of the offense should be imputed to each participant,not depending on the desires of the participant himself,but objectively according to the method of determining unacceptable risks.Correspondingly,we should abandon the naturalistic causality as the main method of determination,because using causality to establish act-dominion and shared-intent and behavioral sharing of participants and thus determining the scope of imputation is itself a reversal of cause and effect.By not making qualitative distinctions within imputation,we can reveal that the forms of complicity are open rather than closed.The view of“stratification not within but outside imputation”aligns with China's mainstream double-layer differentiation system(or

关 键 词：雅各布斯 共同犯罪 积极义务 消极义务 违反负担 共犯从属性 

分 类 号：D914[政治法律—刑法学] D909.1[政治法律—法学]