在将共同犯罪的参与人区分为正犯与狭义的共犯的立法例之下,如何准确、合理地诠释正犯与共犯的关系问题,是共犯论研究中的一个传统而又重要的课题。在大陆法系刑法教义学中,该课题的研究几乎辐射到实行从属性、要素从属性、罪名从属性(共犯本质论)、违法相对性(共犯处罚根据论)等诸多共犯论的根基性问题,相关的研究成果亦较为成熟。但反观我国,其广度和深度均较为有限,一般多是聚焦于共犯的实行从属性和独立性问题的讨论,而对其他诸问题的讨论远未充分展开;并且,相关见解显得过于陈旧,难以因应司法实践的需要。例如,关于实行从属性的问题,早已为德、日刑法学界所摒弃,将“心情刑法”发挥到极致的共犯独立性说依然大行其道于 Under the legislation that divides the participants of the common crime into the accomplice of the just and narrow sense, how to interpret the relationship between the principal and the accomplice accurately and reasonably is a traditional and important topic in the study of the accomplice. In the teaching of the doctrine of criminal law in the civil law system, the research of this subject radiates almost to the basic problems of many accomplice theories such as the subordinate attribute, the subordinate attribute, the subordinate character (the essence of the complicity), the relativity of illegality , The related research results are also more mature. However, in contrast, our country has its breadth and depth limited. Mostly it focuses on the discussion of the issue of the subordinate and independence of accomplice, while the discussion of other issues is far from fully developed. Moreover, the relevant opinions are too old and difficult Due to the need of judicial practice. For example, the question of implementing subordination has long been abandoned by the academic circle of criminal law in Germany and Japan, and it is still popular to use the “criminal law” to the ultimate accomplice independence