論監督過失的客觀預見可能性

On the Possibility of Objective Foresight of Supervisory Negligence

關於如何認定監督過失的客觀預見可能性，通說認為，在對因果關係的基本部分存在預見的場合，肯定客觀結果預見可能性的存在，也即被日本學界廣為主張的具體預見可能性說。與此同時，有學者對因過於「抽象」而廣受批判的危懼感說進行了新的解讀，通過強調「預見可能性的結果回避義務關聯性」，重新鋪設了判斷客觀預見可能性的路徑。甚至另有學者提出了預見可能性不要說，主張以對「危險」的預見取代對「結果」的預見。在當前「具體」與「抽象」的對立中，具體預見可能性說因「一旦定式」的適用而受到挑戰，導致其在處理監督過失問題時更接近於危懼感說。而「預見可能性的結果回避義務關聯性」這一路徑，雖然把握到了預見義務與回避義務間的雙向關聯，卻未能闡明這一關聯的理論基礎。追溯提出監督過失理論的歷史環境可以發現，其與產生新過失論的時代背景更加契合，為此，應在新過失論構造下，基於對社會運作體制的考量，將規範作為認定監督過失之客觀預見可能性的第一手材料。

With regard to how to determine the possibility of objective foresight of supervisory negligence, it is generally believed that when there is foresight to the basic part of causality, the existence of the possibility of objective result foresight is affirmed, that is, the theory of concrete foreseeable possibility, which is widely advocated by Japanese academic circles. At the same time, some scholars have made a new interpretation of the theory of newer criminal negligence, which is widely criticized because it is too “abstract”. By focusing on “the contingency of the obligation to avoid the result of the foreseeable possibility”, they have re-paved the path to judge the possibility of objective foresight. Other scholars even put forward the non-doctrine of foreseeable possibility, advocating that the foresight of “danger” should replace the foresight of “result”. In the present opposition between “concrete” and “abstract”, the theory of concretely foreseeable possibility is challenged because of the application of “once a fixed pattern”, which leads it to be closer to the theory of newer criminal negligence when dealing with the problem of supervisory negligence. In terms of the path of “the contingency of the obligation to avoid the result of the foreseeable possibil-ity”, we can grasp the two-way contingency between foreseeable obligation and avoiding obligation, but we can not clarify the theoretical basis of this contingency. Tracing back to the historical environment of the theory of supervisory negligence, it is found that it is more consistent with the background of the theory of new criminal negligence. Therefore, under the construction of the theory of new criminal negligence, in the light of the consideration of the social operation system, norms should be regarded as the first-hand material to determine the possibility of objective foresight of supervisory negligence.