不能犯中危险判断的客观化倾向之辨正

A Critical Study on the Objectification in Determining the Existence of Dangerous

现有的不能犯理论对主观论存在着诸多误解,其原因在于混淆了未遂犯的处罚根据、不能犯的判断以及法条规定三方面的关系。是否对不能犯进行处罚取决于法条规定,主观说并不会扩张处罚范围。具体危险说自称是客观理论,但其实质是主观理论。抽象危险说虽然备受日本学界批评,但将其放在不法主观化的背景下考察,则需要重新认识其理论意义。台湾地区的刑事立法、大陆地区的理论学说都明显偏向客观主义,对此需要理性分析。重大无知标准是印象理论的具体化,体现了不法主观化的趋势,同时也较为符合我国的刑事司法与刑事立法,且重大无知说在理论支撑力上优于抽象危险说,应予提倡。

Due to the confusion among the punishment foundation of attempted offence,the judgment of impossible crime and the legal regulation,existing theories of impossible crime have some misunderstandings about subjective theory. Whether impossible crime is punished depends on the legal regulation. The subjective theory does not expand the scope of punishment. The essence of specific hazard theory is actually a subjective theory,while claiming itself to be an objective theory. Although abstract hazard theory is criticized by many Japanese scholars,we need to reconsider its theoretical significance by placing it in the background of subjectivized unlawfulness. The criminal regulations of Taiwan District and theories of mainland obviously tend to objectivism,which needs to be rationally analyzed. The criteria of great ignorance belongs to the concretion of impression theory,reflecting the trend of subjectivized unlawfulness,and also keeping pace with China's criminal justice and penal legislation. Besides,this theory has more theoretical advantage than abstract hazard theory. To sum up,the great ignorance theory deserves to be advocated.