论文部分内容阅读
犯罪参与体系为共犯论研究提供理论参照,不同共犯立法决定了差异化的犯罪参与体系。我国共犯独特的立法特征决定了我国犯罪参与体系介于单一正犯体系与二元参与体系之间,但偏向于二元区分制。与该体系相匹配,应提倡双层次共犯评价理论。共犯评价的第一层次解决定性问题,在正犯与共犯界分标准上应坚持形式区分说;共犯评价的第二层次研究定量问题,在主犯与从犯区分标准上强调参与者对犯罪事实的支配力,考察参与行为在共同犯罪中的作用大小。双层次共犯评价理论下,正犯与主犯、共犯与从犯之间没有内在必然对应关系。我国共犯论构建,没有必要、也不宜遵从“正犯主犯化”趋势。
The crime participation system provides theoretical reference for the study of the accomplice, and the different criminals’ legislation determines the differentiated crime participation system. The unique legislative features of China’s accomplice determine that the system of criminal participation in our country lies between the single criminal system and the dual participation system, but it is biased towards the dual distinction system. In line with this system, a two-level evaluation theory of accomplice should be promoted. The first level of accomplices evaluation to solve the qualitative problems, should be formally differentiated between the standards of offender and accomplice; the second level of the evaluation of accomplice to study the quantitative issues, emphasizing participants’ control of criminal facts , Examining the role of participation in joint crime size. Under the theory of double-level accomplice evaluation, there is no inherent inevitable correspondence between the principal offender, accomplice and accomplice. It is not necessary or advisable for our country to establish a total offense and should not follow the trend of “being the criminal of the criminal.”