论文部分内容阅读
在德日的犯罪论体系中,一般认为“构成要件”拥有如下六项机能:“故意规制机能”、“犯罪个别化机能”、“违法性推定机能”、“诉讼法机能”、“责任推定机能”、“明示共犯的从属对象的机能”。但实际上,上述六项机能不可能在同一个犯罪论体系中发挥作用。为了解决故意或过失的定位、主观性不法要素的认定,共犯从属形式的采用、构成要件符合性与违法性之间的联系,以及客观性违法要素的定位等复杂问题,犯罪论体系中的构成要件必须对自己可以发挥的机能进行取舍。真正可以发挥作用的只有“违法性推定机能”与“明示共犯的从属对象的机能”。其他的四项机能实际上是难以完整地奏效的。并且,“不法·责任”体系论具有其他犯罪论体系所不具备的优势。
In the crime theory system of Germany and Japan, it is generally believed that “Constitutional Elements ” has the following six functions: “Intentional Regulation Function ”, “Individualized Criminal Function ”, “Illegal Presumption Function ”Procedural Law “, ”presumption of responsibility “, ”express subordinate object of accomplice “. However, in fact, the above six functions can not play a role in the same crime theory. In order to solve the problem of intentional or negligent positioning, identification of subjective unlawful elements, the adoption of accomplice subordination forms, the connection between elements compliance and illegality, as well as the positioning of objective elements of infringement, the composition of the criminal theory system Requirements must be able to play their own functions to choose. What really works is only the ”function of the presumption of illegitimacy“ and the ”function of the subordinate object that explicitly expresses the accomplice.“ The other four functions are actually difficult to fully work. And ”lawfulness and responsibility " system theory has the advantages that other systems of crime do not have.