犯罪构成之共同要件研究

On the Constituents of Crime

由我国实质意义的犯罪构成模式所决定,我们不能简单套用德日或者英美的刑事责任判定模式,也不能把犯罪客体要件驱逐出犯罪构成系统。以"犯罪的发生顺序"构建犯罪构成不合乎犯罪的认定逻辑,且以"行为人为中心"的所有新构想都与我国社会主义初级阶段——民主与法治尚属起步之时令不合。界定刑法上的危害行为需要强调犯罪工具;刑法上的因果关系虽不是构成要件,却是危害结果认定的客观标准,体系上应放在危害结果的认定部分来阐述;不同身份者共同犯罪构成之罪罪名相异时,应采用"为主职务利用说"来解决定罪问题;"客观的超过要素"在我国犯罪构成体系中没有存在的余地。

Restricted by the essential criminal constitutional pattern in China, the criminal responsibility trial pattern of Germany, Japan, UK and USA cannot be simply applied, and the object constituent cannot be expelled from the system that constitutes a crime. Moreover, the previous ideas and models do not keep up with the primary stage of socialism in our country its democracy and legal system are still at the starting stage. Since defining the harmful behavior in criminal law needs to emphasize the criminal tools, the cause and effect relationship is not the constitutional element in criminal law but the objective criteria on recognizing the harmful results. When different men commit a crime but are charged differently, we should adopt ＂the assumption of main duty＂ to solve the problem of conviction rather than ＂the objective fact out of fault＂ for its nonexistence leeway in our criminal constitutional pattern.