論利益歸屬對犯罪參與類型界分的影響，以財產性犯罪為中心

中外司法實務在區分核心和次要的犯罪參與類型時，慣常地考慮參與人的利益歸屬情況。特別是對於財產性犯罪，直接突破了以構成要件為中心的區分模式，格外側重於參與人對經濟利益的歸屬。對此，學界尚未進行充分的理論詮釋。在肯定利益歸屬影響論的基礎上，將利益歸屬作為綜合區分標準的影響因子之一的做法，不具有體系理性;將利益歸屬作為認定參與行為發揮的客觀作用的間接事實，未體現關聯性;將利益歸屬作為認定參與人主觀意思的情狀證據，不具有明確性。犯罪參與類型的區分標準具有遞進序列的主客觀層次，在確認參與人具有實施構成要件的具體行為能力的基礎上，利益歸屬是推定參與人是否具有實施構成要件的行為意志的間接事實。財產性犯罪具有強烈的追求利益的經濟性格，以利益歸屬推定參與人實施構成要件的行為意志，在財產性犯罪中具有更可靠的推定效果。

"When distinguishing principal and secondary participants of joint crime, Chinese and foreign jurisprudence always considers the interests that participants get from crime participation. Especially for property crime, in many cases, the differentiation does not depend on the implementation of crime constitution, but on the economic interests of the participants. However, for this issue, the existing literature needs further improvement. It is not reasonable to consider interest belonging as one of the influencing factors of the comprehensive standard; it doesn’t show relevance to regard interest belonging as an indirect fact to identify the objective role of the participants; and it is not clear to regard interest belonging as evidence of mental elements of the participants. The standard of distinguishing different types of participants has a progressive sequence between objective and subjective elements. On the basis of confirming that the participants have the specific capacity to implement crime constitution, interest belonging is an indirect fact to infer whether the participants have the will to carry out crime constitution. Since property crime has a strong character of pursuing interests, it has higher credibility when using the factor of interest belonging to infer the will of the participants."