摘要
犯罪事实支配是现实的支配,规范的犯罪事实支配不可取。犯罪事实支配并非确定正犯的唯一标准,其只能适用于支配犯,且其并非证成义务犯的要素之一。犯罪事实支配不包含特殊的客观构成要素,只有义务犯的概念能够以教义学上不矛盾而刑事政策上又恰当的方式解决无身份的故意工具问题。具有特殊的主观构成要件要素的情况完全处于犯罪事实支配理论的射程之内,但是在断绝的结果犯和短缩的二行为犯中,结论并不一样。
Tatherrschaft（control of Corpus Delicti） refers to realistic control rather than normative control,that is,Taherrschaft cannot be accepted.Tatherrschaft is not the exclusive factor to determine the principal criminal but only applicable for dominant criminal,besides,it is not one of constitutive elements for proving obligatory criminal.Since Tatherrschaft doesn＇t contain special objective constitutive element,only the concept of obligatory criminal,which is consistent to dogmatic and proper in criminal policies,can solve the problem of intentional tools without status.As for special subjective constitutive elements,the scope of Tatherrschaftslehre is well applied,but the conclusion is different with different types of absichtsdelikte.
出处
《北方法学》
2011年第5期72-78,共7页
Northern Legal Science
