未遂的認定與故意行為危險

未遂犯的判斷重心在於行為不法。判斷行為不法，必須重視主觀不法。故意是主觀不法要素。故意行為危險具有目的性與支配性，過失行為危險具有任意性與盲目性。考察未遂犯，重點在於考察故意行為危險的創設、發展及實現。在危險創設階段，一方面，著手決意應具有現實性，實行意向不等於著手決意。另一方面，著手決意應具有確定性。承認著手決意與實行決意的分離，可以妥當處理“以不確定事實為基礎的決意”案件。在危險發展階段，著手決意不要求具有堅定性，但“保留中止的決意”案件不構成中止。在危險實現階段，故意行為危險所成就的因果關係具有確定性，過失行為危險所成就的因果關係具有盲目性。對二者不能等而視之。結果歸屬的條件是故意行為危險現實化為構成要件結果，依此可以妥當解決結果的提前實現問題。

Illegal practice is the key to judge an attempted crime. Nevertheless, the illegality of the subjective elements should be considered when judging delict malfeasance. The criminal intent is subjective elements. The danger of intentional action has aim and dominative motivation; while the danger of the negligent act is arbitrary and aimless. To examine an attempted crime, the danger of intentional action must first be investigated through three stages: planning and creating, developing, and accomplished. At the stage of planning and creating a danger, an intention is not equal to commencing on intent, which should be a reality; second, commencing on intent should be a certainty. Recognizing the difference between commencing on intent and implementing intent can deal with the case of “decisionmaking based on uncertain fact” more properly. At the stage of developing a danger, implementing intent does not require determination, but “having an idea of suspension when implementing intent” does not constitute a suspension of implementing. At the stage of accomplishing a danger, causation created by the danger of intentional act is certain, while causation caused by negligent act is uncertain-these two issues should be differentiated from each other; moreover, the condition of attributing a result to a crime is that the actualized danger of intentional act should become the result of constitutive elements.