论共谋而未参与实行类型主犯的认定  

On the Recognition of Conspiracy without Participation in the Execution Type of Principal Offenders

作　　者：黎宏[1] Li Hong

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院

出　　处：《政法论坛》2025年第2期95-108,共14页Tribune of Political Science and Law

基　　金：国家社科基金一般项目“中国自主刑法知识体系建构研究”(24BFX113);清华大学文科自主科研项目“中国特色刑法教义学话语体系建构研究”(2023THZWJC22)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：近年来,将共谋而未参与实行类型的共犯人认定为主犯的判决,引人注目。但是,在刑法理论上如何对其详尽说理,是一个比较棘手的问题。在这一点上,可以参考日本的“共谋共同正犯”概念,将共同正犯的行为不限于具体构成要件的实行行为,而从为结果的发生提供与实行犯同等程度或者匹配的因果影响的视角出发,将支配或者操控了行为过程,影响了共犯结果发生的“共谋”行为认定为“共同正犯”乃至“主犯”。在进行这种判断的时候,首先要考虑行为人是不是具有“共谋”行为,其次考虑行为人的“共谋”行为是不是在引起共同犯罪结果的过程中发挥了“重要作用”。In recent years,the judgment that the co-criminals who conspire without participating in the implementation type are identified as principal offenders is striking.However,it is a relatively tricky issue to elaborate on this in criminal law theory.In this regard,we can refer to the Japanese concept of"complicity co-perpetrators",which does not limit the acts of the co-perpetrator to the implementation of specific components,but dominates or controls the behavior process from the perspective of providing causal influence equal to or matching with that of the perpetrator.The"conspiracy"behavior that affects the outcome of the joint crime is identified as"co-perpetrator"or even"principal".In making such a judgment,the first consideration is whether the perpetrator has engaged in"conspiracy"acts,followed by whether the perpetrator's"conspiracy"acts have played a"significant role"in causing the result of the joint crime.

关 键 词：共同犯罪 共谋 正犯 主犯 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]