论违法多元性的理论依据与归责原则

Study on The Theoretical Basis and the Principle of Imputation of Illegal Diversity

在违法性判断的问题上,是坚持严格的违法一元论还是缓和的违法一元论,抑或违法多元论,在刑法理论上聚讼颇多。法秩序统一原理应当在目的层面作实质性理解,而不应仅停留在逻辑层面作形式性理解。在规范保护目的解释下的违法多元性理论并不违反法秩序统一原理。在司法实践中,应当对违法性进行合目的的实质、独立的判断,这意味着:在民法和行政法上具有违法性的行为,未必具有刑事违法性;而在民法和行政法上不具有违法性,在刑法上也可能具有违法性。对于同一行为事实同时触犯了刑法和其他部门法,若不同法规范保护目的是一致的,则在达成该目的的前提下,行为人只承担择一的责任;若不同规范保护目的不一致,则应兼顾不同保护目的,使行为人承担聚合责任。在前一种情况下,确定行为人是承担刑事责任还是其他责任,同样需要根据社会危害性标准对行为进行和目的的实质、独立判断。

On the issue of illegal judgment,whether it is to adhere to the strict illegal monism or to moderate the illegal monism,or the illegal pluralism,there are quite a lot of criminal law theory.The principle of unification of law and order should be substantively understood at the level of purpose,and should not be merely at the logical level for formal understanding.The theory of illegal pluralism under the interpretation of normative protection purposes does not violate the principle of unification of law order.In judicial practice,the substantive and independent judgment of the illegality should be made.This means that illegal behavior in civil law and administrative law may not be criminally illegal in criminal law;but in civil law and administrative law.There is no illegality in the law,and it may also be illegal in criminal law.If the same behavioral facts violate the criminal law and other departmental laws at the same time,if the purpose of the protection of the different laws and regulations is the same,then the actor will only assume the responsibility of choosing one if the purpose is achieved;if the purpose of the different norms is inconsistent,then Taking into account different protection purposes,the actor is responsible for the aggregation.In the former case,it is determined whether the perpetrator is criminally liable or otherwise responsible,as well as the substantive and independent judgment of the conduct and purpose of the act according to the socially harmful criteria.