「刑法」第29條第2款的法理分析

A Jurisprudential Analysis of Article 29.2 of Criminal Law

盡管刑法第23條第1款和第29條第1款給共犯從屬性說明留出了論證空間，但刑法第29條第2款構成了該說的法律障礙，該款事實上反映的是教唆的獨立性。在解釋該款時，應將法律規定上教唆的未遂和學理上未遂的教唆區分開，並將該款解釋為立法上規定的、教唆犯獨立成立的例外條款。雖然獨立性例外說和兩重性說一樣，都會促進將第29條第2款解釋為未遂，以及都無法解決因立法之故而導致的處刑失調，但在法律適用上和從屬性原則立場上，獨立性例外說開不同於兩重性說。As to the relation between the perpetrator and the accomplice, we should maintain the theory of acces-sory from the perspective of the principle of legality. In China, the theory of accessory could only be deduced from the present Article 23. 1 and Article 29. 1. However, Article 29. 2 of Criminal Law factually reflects the independence of instigation. In interpreting this article, the versuchte Anstiftung and Anstiftung zum Versuch should be distinguished strictly. We also ought to interpret Article 29. 2 as an exception for independence of instigation. This kind of exception for independence is not a new kind of theory of duality from the perspective of law application and the standpoint of accessory, although there are similarities between the theory of dual-ity and that of exception for independence. That is to say, both of the two theories interpret Article 29. 2 as an attempt ,and could not resolve the imbalance of punishment in legislation.