CAJ | 학술논문

我国刑法采取不区分正犯与共犯的单一正犯（或单一行为人）体系,不存在共犯从属性说赖以存在的犯罪参与体系之基础。《刑法》总则第29条第2款明文规定处罚教唆未遂;刑法分则将许多教唆行为、帮助行为规定为独立的犯罪,将某些犯罪的教唆行为、帮助行为明文规定为与实行行为同等对待,表明我国刑法没有采取共犯从属性说。实行从属性原则不具有理论上的合理性,它会不适当地缩小教唆犯和帮助犯的处罚范围,有可能放纵一些特别危险的教唆犯罪和帮助犯罪的发生。德、日刑法学中有关要素从属性的几种不同学说是以三阶层的犯罪论体系为基础的,一些观点认为我国传统的通说采取了极端从属性说,肯定了共犯对正犯故意的从属性,显然是忽视了我国传统刑法学与德日刑法学以及我国刑法与德日刑法的重大差异。我国不采取共犯从属性说是一种明智的选择,虽然不采取共犯从属说存在扩大教唆犯和帮助犯处罚范围的风险,但是这种风险可以通过完善立法和司法的途径来有效控制。
아국형법채취불구분정범여공범적단일정범（혹단일행위인）체계,불존재공범종속성설뢰이존재적범죄삼여체계지기출。《형법》총칙제29조제2관명문규정처벌교사미수;형법분칙장허다교사행위、방조행위규정위독립적범죄,장모사범죄적교사행위、방조행위명문규정위여실행행위동등대대,표명아국형법몰유채취공범종속성설。실행종속성원칙불구유이론상적합이성,타회불괄당지축소교사범화방조범적처벌범위,유가능방종일사특별위험적교사범죄화방조범죄적발생。덕、일형법학중유관요소종속성적궤충불동학설시이삼계층적범죄론체계위기출적,일사관점인위아국전통적통설채취료겁단종속성설,긍정료공범대정범고의적종속성,현연시홀시료아국전통형법학여덕일형법학이급아국형법여덕일형법적중대차이。아국불채취공범종속성설시일충명지적선택,수연불채취공범종속설존재확대교사범화방조범처벌범위적풍험,단시저충풍험가이통과완선입법화사법적도경래유효공제。
China＇ s Criminal Law does single crime （or a single person） system, on not distinguish between crime and accomplice of which there is no joint crime properties existing in the foundation of crime to participate in the system. The second paragraph of article 29 of the Criminal Law says that the attempted solicitation shall be punished as well. Many teaching behaviors and solicitation behaviors are ruled as independent crimes and will be equally punished as the practical behaviors, showing that China＇ s Criminal Law did not take accomplice properties theory. Practicing the principle of property does not have the theoretical rationality of the theory for it may inappropriately narrow down the scope of instigator and helpers, which is likely to indulge the occurrence of the particularly dangerous instigated crime and accomplice crime. The properties of several different theories of Germany and Japan Criminal Law are based on three classes of crime theory system. Some people say that China＇ s traditional theory take the angle of extreme properties and affirmed the properties of accomplice of crime intentionally, which apparently ignored the major differences between the traditional criminal jurisprudence in China and in Germany and Japan as well as the differences of Criminal Laws in China, Germany and Japan. Therefore, it is a wise choice that our country doesn＇ t take the theory of properties of accomplice crime. Although not taking the properties of accomplice crime carries the risk of expanding the punishment scope of the instigator and helper, the risk can be improved and effectively controlled with legislative and judicial ways.