摘要
大陆法系将实行行为等同于着手的做法存在诸多弊病,从历史发展上考察,着手一开始与构成要件行为无关,而后与构成要件的实行行为紧紧勾连,直至实质客观说,二者实现了相对分离。"实行"与"着手"概念的理论基底不同,实行行为是因果力的起点,承载了犯罪个别化与构成要件分析的双重机能;而着手是作为未遂处罚的起点,更多地浸染了刑事政策的因素考量。将"着手"与"实行"拆离,引入英美法系类型化的未遂犯客观行为标准,根据不同的犯罪类型进行利益衡量后确定刑法的介入时点,对现有问题的解决颇有裨益。
The practice that continental law system equates act of perpetrating with initiation has a lot of maladies.Inspected from historical development,initiation is not related with constitutive requirement behavior at the very beginning,and then initiation is closely connected with constitutive requirement＇s act of perpetrating.When entering into the period of essence-objective theory,act of perpetrating and initiation realize a relative separation.The theoretical base between＂implement＂ and ＂initiation＂ concepts is different.Act of perpetrating is the origin of cause and effect force,which bears a double function of crime individualization and constitutive requirement analysis.But initiation,as the origin of uncommitted punishment,is more infected with criminal policy＇s factor consideration.Separating ＂initiation＂ from ＂implement＂,introducing the uncommitted crime＇s objective behavior standard of Anglo-American law system typology,and confirming criminal law＇s intervention time-point after balancing of interest according to different types of crime are to the benefit of current problems＇ settlement.
出处
《行政与法》
2016年第7期92-100,共9页
Administration and Law
关键词
着手
实行行为
未遂
类型化
initiation
act of perpetrating
the uncommitted
typology
