行政不法事實與犯罪事實的層次性理論

我國刑法確立了大量以行政違法為前提的罪名。司法機關要認定這類犯罪事實，就應同時確認行為人構成行政不法事實和“特定構成要件事實”。根據行政處罰與犯罪的包容性原理、兩種處罰後果的階層性理論以及兩種事實錯誤的成本理論，我們將行政不法事實與犯罪事實視為處於兩個不同位階的法律事實，兩者無論是在證明物件、調查取證的方式、對非法取證的救濟上還是在事實認定標準上，都存在著實質性的差異。按照這一理論，法律對行政證據向犯罪證據的轉化要施加嚴格的限制，行政機關所作的行政處罰認定結論對於刑事司法機關並不具有預決的效力。當然，在一些特定的場合下，基於效率、便利等實用性的考慮，也可以確立層次性理論的若干例外。

The Chinese Criminal Law has established a large number of crime based on administrative violation. If the judge wants to affirm this kind of crime, he should affirm the administrative illegality and the fact conforming to specific constitutive elements at the same time. According to the inclusiveness principle of administrative penalty and crime, the stratification theory of two consequences of punishment and the cost theory of two factual errors, we regard the administrative violation and crime as two facts of different legal levels. They have substantial differences in the object of proof, the way of investigation, the relief of illegal evidence collection and the standard of affirming the fact. According to the theory, the law needs impose strict restrictions on the conversion of administrative evidence to criminal evidence. The conclusion of administrative penalty determination made by administrative organ has no pre-judgmental effect on criminal judicial organ. Certainly, some exceptions to the stratification theory can be established in some specific occasions, based on the consideration of practical elements, such as efficiency and convenience.