机动车所有人、管理人之刑事责任研究——以危险驾驶罪为视角

Study on the Criminal Responsibility of the Motor Vehicle Owner and the Administrator——From the Perspective of Crime of Danger Driving

《刑法修正案(九)》新增第一百三十三条第二款对机动车所有人、管理人的刑事责任之规定。该款属于法律拟制,因此其第一款第一项、第二项行为不属于第二款所规制之范围。第二款最大的作用是将机动车所有人、管理人本来的不作为、过失之行为拟制为故意犯罪。而机动车所有人、管理人应负刑事责任的法理基础,不仅是共犯理论,还包含监督管理过失理论。机动车所有人、管理人有两种过失类型:共犯型与监督管理过失型。对于共犯型机动车所有人、管理人应采取共犯理论加以理解:"危化品"型危险驾驶罪是故意犯罪,但不要求行为人对"危及公共安全"有故意;认定行为人与机动车所有人、管理者成立危险驾驶罪的共犯与行为人构成交通肇事罪并不矛盾。而对于监督管理过失型的机动车所有人、管理人的认定,要采用监督管理过失之法理,考察注意义务、结果预见可能性、结果回避可能性的内容,通过信赖原则限定其处罚范围。

The second section of Article 133 of the Amendment Ⅸ to the Criminal Law defines on the criminal liability of all persons and administrtors of motor vehicles. The nature of the section is a legal draft,so Paragraphs( 1)-( 2) of the first section are not within the scope of the regulation of the second section. The largest role of the second section is to make the motor vehicle owner, the administrator’s original omission and negligence act as intentional crime. However,the legal basis of the criminal responsibility of the owner and manager of the motor vehicle is not only the accomplice theory,but also the theory of supervision and management negligence. There are two types of motor vehicle owners’ fault and administrators’ fault: accomplice and supervisory management fault. For motor vehicle owners or administrators of the accomplice type,it should be understood from the accomplice theory: the"critical chemicals"type of dangerous driving offence is a deliberate crime,but does not require the perpetrator to intentionally "endanger public security". It is not contradictory to identify the accomplices of the perpetrator and the motor vehicle owners and administrators to establish the crime of dangerous driving. For the cognizance of the owners and administrators of the supervisory management fault,it should use legal tools to supervise and manage the negligence of duty of care,pay attention to the possibility of foreseeing the results and avoiding possibility of result and limit the scope of the penalty according to trust principle.