未遂處罰根據的功能性危險論證

在未遂理論中存在正當性與有效性的二律背反，在這一視角下未遂處罰根據成為問題。在不法論證和目的論證的範式下，傳統論證雖然揭示了未遂處罰根據與因果關係的聯繫，卻未能有效實現正當性與有效性的貫通。較新的理論回歸不法論證，其中法關係論證和行為反價值論證無法通過功能性檢驗，而新危險性理論與規範效力論證則存在融合契機。危險思維與法治原則相契合並能標示禁止，在危險概念下應區分危險性與危殆化。未遂犯是適格的構成要件危殆犯，應從普遍有效性意義上理解這裡的危險。功能的危險性是指，理性裁判者將自己代入行為人的感官知覺中作出事實理解，並根據科學法則認為其行為可能實現構成要件。功能的危殆化則是指，在行為的作用範圍內已經產生對他人的交互性影響。

In the theory of criminal attempt, the antinomy between the legitimacy and efficiency of the punishment opens the debate on the rationale for punishing criminal attempt. According to a new paradigm based on unlawfulness arguments versus teleological arguments, although the traditional proposals reveal the correlation between the rationale for punishing criminal attempt and the theory of causation, they fail to connect the legitimacy and the efficiency of the punishment. Contemporary theories have returned to the unlawfulness arguments. Therefore, the approach of legal relations and the approach of actoriented mode cannot pass the functionality test; on the contrary, there is a possibility to combine the new theory of dangerousness and the approach of normativism to strengthen the argumentation. The idea of danger conforms to the principle of rule of law and labels prohibitions. Under the danger concept, one can distinguish dangerousness from endangerment; the criminal attempt is an eligible offense with typical endangerment, and hence the notion danger shall be interpreted in the sense of universality. Functional dangerousness means the possibility of the fulfillment of an offense definition, which a reasonable judicator in the sensory perception of the perpetrator and his own understanding estimates in accordance with scientific laws. Functional endangerment means the range of the conduct has reached the key elements such as the object.