不纯正不作为犯之作为义务来源的实质化

Sources Substantiation of Acting Duty of Impure Omission

不纯正不作为犯以不作为的方式达到与作为犯相同的法律效果,其作为义务来源乃支撑刑罚处罚的实质依据。传统的四来源表征形式化的分类无法解释不作为行为性及原因力的问题,新的实质化理论层出不穷,“支配说”“功能说”“违法性说”等都在不同程度上完成了解释的使命,但面对“流于形式、疏于实质”的诟病仍然表现出束手无策之感。不同解释论对实质化的探讨,尚未得出一个能够全面评价作为义务来源的结论。

In a way of omission,impure omission achieves the same legal effect as crime of omission. Classification of traditional four-source representations cannot explain the problems of omission behaviors and causal forces. New substantive theories emerge in an endless stream,such as“domination theory”,“function theory”and “illegality theory”,which have accomplished the mission of interpretation in varying degrees. However,faced with the criticism of“being mere in form and neglecting substance”,the theories can do nothing to help. Different interpretations have not yet reached a conclusion that can comprehensively evaluate the source of acting duty.