类型学的犯罪故意概念之提倡——对德国刑法学故意学说争议的反思

The Promotion of Criminal Intent Definition in Typology

百余年来德国刑法学在故意概念问题上发展出意志要素无用论、意志要素必要论和间接故意与有认识过失合一论三种基本主张的对立,以及十余种标记鲜明的理论学说。学说争议的出发点是为存在构造上具有区别的不同心理现象配置不同的责任,争议焦点在于意志要素无用和有用、行为意志和结果意志、客观危险和主观危险的对立。各种学说部分成功又部分失败的努力,以及彼此之间描述性而非实质性的区别都表明,故意界定的理论发展方向应由实体法视角转向程序法视角,由概念思维转向类型思维。在观念分界的意义上,故意是做成可能侵害法益的意志决定;在事实认定的意义上,提倡建构类型学的故意概念,通过对能够反映认识和意志强度的待证事实的解释性推论,来推断案件事实是否在整体上"充足"故意的类型。

As to the concept of criminal intent,German criminal law has developed three different views including ten kinds of different theories which are volitional element unnecessary and volitional element essential and the syncretism of indirect intent and cognitive negligence in the last hundred years. The starting point of theoretical disagreement is to allocate corresponding responsibilities for different psychological phenomenon differing in existing structure. Focus of the dispute lies in the opposition of usefulness and uselessness of volitional element,essential and behavioral volition and consequential volition,and subjective risk and objective risk. The descriptive not essential differences between these theories and their imperfection show that the academic development direction of criminal intent should turn the perspective from substantive law into procedural law and turn the thinking model from concept into type. In the sense of ideal boundary,intent is the volitional decision to infringe legal interest. While fact finding is concerned,people should promote a kind of typological concept of intent. The stylized concept of criminal intention is using a dynamic combination of the elements of cognition and volition to distinguish criminal intent and negligence.