犯罪预备“实行性”规则的释义与适用

Interpretation and Application of the“Implementation”Rule of Criminal Preparation

刑法学界和实务界产生预备行为实行化以及形式预备犯处罚的主流解读,有违《刑法》第22条的规范事实,也导致实质预备犯的合理增设以及重大法益侵害紧迫危险的预备犯规制饱受预防刑法体系过度前置化之诟病。犯罪预备并非着手实行前的犯罪状态,预备行为本身就具备“实行性”客观状态,而并非由法律拟制或修正构成要件而来。犯罪预备“实行性”规则包括两部分内容:其一,犯罪预备行为实行性在于描述中立性的事实状态;其二,预备犯实行性在于确立否定性的价值评价。基于此,预备实行行为存在既遂、未遂、中止等犯罪形态。“行为具体性和危害直接性”的二元标准说应当作为预备实行行为的“着手”认定方法,这可以更为明确地防止一般性违法行为或者日常生活行为被纳入预备犯的规制范畴。

At present,the general interpretation of the implementation of preparatory acts and the punishment of formal preparatory offenders in the academia and practioners of criminal law is inconsistent with the normative facts of Article 22 of the Criminal Law.It also leads to the reasonable addition of substantive preparatory crimes and the urgent and dangerous regulation of preparatory crimes against major legal interests,which is criticized to be the excessive prepositioning of the preventive criminal law system.Criminal preparation is not a criminal state before the status of starting to implement,and the preparatory act itself has the objective state of“implementation”,rather than the legal drafting or amendment of the constituent elements.The“implementation”rules of criminal preparation include two parts:first,the executive of criminal preparation is to describe the factual state of neutrality;second,the implementation of preparatory crime lies in the establishment of negative value evaluation.Based on this,the act of preparation for execution has the different forms of accomplished,attempted and suspended crime.The dualistic standard of“behavior specificity and harmfulness directness”should be used as the“start”identification benchmark of preparatory behavior,which can more clearly prevent general illegal behavior or daily behavior from being included in the regulation category of preparatory crime.