作为与不作为之区分的目的理性思考——以德国判例与学说为借镜

Between Action and Omission:Taking German Judicial Opinions and Legal Theories as Reference

不作为犯在本体结构和规范标准上有其特殊性,而在多义举止方式及"通过作为的不作为"等场合,作为与不作为的区分成为问题。在德国,不真正不作为犯有其独特的法定要件和法律后果,区分作为与不作为对我国司法实践的意义在于,是否通过保证人地位限缩处罚范围。根据这一目的指引,停止能量投入应被合目的地理解为能量不投入即不作为,其他特定方向上的能量投入皆为作为。该标准适用于真正的多义举止方式和中断救助,而"逆形态参与"、原因自由不作为和作为与不作为的竞合都不是真正的行为形态区分问题。

Because of the ontological and normative particularities of criminal omis- sions, the distinction between action and omission is a major problem in the cases of ambiguous behavior and ＂omission via action＂. In the German Criminal Code, a number of special condi- tions and an optional mitigation are provided to criminal omission, whereas in China the practi- cal significance of the distinction is whether a limitation of punishment by means of guaranty is necessary. For this purpose, the input of energy that stops a continuous input of energy is to be understood as non-input of energy, i.e. omission, whereas inputs of energy in other directions are still actions. This rule applies to genuinely ambiguous behavior and termination of rescue. The problems of ＂participation through behavior in inverted form＂, omissio libera in causa, and competition between action and omission do not belong to the distinction between action and o- mission in the first place and therefore have no influence on the above-mentioned criterion.