| 论教唆犯之正犯的具体对象错误 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 安军.论教唆犯之正犯的具体对象错误[J].海南大学学报(人文社会科学版),2012,30(2):80-84. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 安军 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 中国人民大学法学院,北京,100872 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 山东政法学院科研规划课题《雇佣犯罪问题研究》的中期成果 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 对于具体对象错误的归责——具体符合说以及法定符合说均存在缺陷,其争论源于所持的不同故意观；而且二者都过分强调了故意的认识因素,却忽视了意志因素,所以,对具体事实错误的归责应回归故意理论.而教唆犯之正犯的具体对象错误的归责也必须依据教唆犯的故意内容,同时还需结合共犯从属性.
|
| 关 键 词： | 具体对象错误 具体打击错误 正犯 教唆犯 |
The Concrete Object Mistake of Principal Offender in Abetment |
| |
| AN Jun.The Concrete Object Mistake of Principal Offender in Abetment[J].Humanities & Social Sciences Journal of Hainan University,2012,30(2):80-84. |
| |
| Authors: | AN Jun |
| |
| Institution: | AN Jun(Law School,Renmin University of China,Beijing 100872,China) |
| |
| Abstract: | In terms of liability imputation of concrete object mistake,both concrete accord doctrine and legally prescribed accord doctrine are deficient.Their controversy stems from different views to criminal intention;and furthermore,both excessively emphasize on the cognitive factor,but ignore the will factor of criminal intention.So liability fixation of concrete object mistake should return to the theory of criminal intention.The liability imputation of the concrete object mistake of principal offender in abetment must be based on the intended content of abettor and be combined with the dependency of accomplice. |
| |
| Keywords: | concrete object mistake concrete strike mistake principal offender abettor |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
|
