德日等域外国家已有过失危险犯之刑事立法,其刑法学界议题已从过失危险犯可否设立之应然问题转为司法实务之该当解释。我国学界依然处在可否设立之讨论阶段,该问题之解决路径可分为两个层面:理论层面和事实现状。从刑法学理层面讲,犯罪之成立包括主观罪过和客观危害(含行为之危险性),法益破坏之危险状态与实害结果同属于客观危害之行为结果,过失与故意同样具有主观之可谴责性,且过失犯之可罚性重在客观危害,危险状态其对法益之破坏不亚于实害结果,因此在理论层面过失危险犯是完全可以成立的。结合其他学科对我国安全生产事故之系统性的实证调研数据,纵向趋势虽有所改观,但是横向比较依然严峻,现今行政体制及经济发展政策的背景下,基于行政执法不严、实效不佳的前提,事故类犯罪危险犯之设立有其必要性。 Countries outside Germany, Japan and other countries have criminal legislation of criminal negligence, and their topics of criminal law and scholarship have been explained from the question of whether or not the criminal of negligence can be established to the judicial practice. The academic circle of our country is still in the stage of discussing the possibility of establishment. The solution to this problem can be divided into two levels: the theoretical level and the actual status quo. From the legal level of criminal law, the establishment of crime includes the subjective sin and objective harm (including the risk of behavior), the dangerous state of legal interest damage and the result of the actual harm belong to the result of the act of objective harm, and the negligence and the will of the same subjective condemnation , And the penalty of negligent commits lies in the objective hazard. In dangerous state, the damage to the beneficial interest is no less than the result of real harm, so the dangerous criminals in theory can be established completely. Combined with the empirical data from other disciplines on China’s production safety accidents, although the vertical trends have changed, the horizontal comparison is still grim. Against the background of the current administrative system and economic development policies, based on the weak administrative law enforcement and ineffectiveness Premise, the crime of accidental crime committed the establishment of its necessity.