论作为义务来源中先行行为范围的限定  

The Restriction on Advance Behavior of Obligation Source

作　　者：陈琛 

机构地区：[1]浙江理工大学法政学院,浙江 杭州

出　　处：《法学（汉斯）》2023年第6期4804-4810,共7页Open Journal of Legal Science

摘　　要：先行行为是我国不真正不作为犯的作为义务来源之一,其边界和引起的作为义务内容并不明确,不利于罪与非罪、此罪与彼罪、一罪与数罪的划分。形式法义务论具有局限性,只有实质法义务论才能解决这些问题。客观归责理论能够对先行行为进行有效限定,因此,先行行为要引起作为义务应当首先是创设危险或者升高危险的行为,其次先行行为与损害后果之间具有风险关联。具有违法阻却事由的行为、过失犯罪行为与故意犯罪行为都能成立先行行为。Advance behavior is one of the obligation sources of offense of non-typical omission in our country. Its limit and the obligation to act it caused is ambiguous, which is adverse to the differentiation between crime and non-crime, crime and other crime, one and several crimes. Formal law obligation theory has limitations while only substantive law obligation theory can solve these problems. The theory of objective imputation can exert effective restriction on advance behavior. Therefore, the advance behavior which can cause obligation to act should be a behavior which creates or elevates risks first. Then advance behavior and damage consequence should be relevant. Elimination of misfeasance, negligence crime and deliberate crime can become advance behavior.

关 键 词：不作为犯 先行行为 作为义务 客观归责 

分 类 号：D92[政治法律—法学]