受賄罪中“為他人謀取利益”的體系地位：混合違法要素說的提倡

Systematic Status of 'Securing Benefits for Another Person ' in the Crime of Acceptance of Bribes: Advocating Mixed Element of Illegality

學說上關於“為他人謀取利益”在被動型受賄罪中的體系地位，形成了客觀說與主觀說的基本對立，而主張至少要求承諾行為的所謂新客觀說，實質上是主觀說。傳統客觀說存在容易導致處罰漏洞等明顯缺陷，而主觀說則在事後受賄等場合力有不逮。相對於“是客觀要件還是主觀要件”這種形式化的提問方式，更應追問“為他人謀取利益”對受賄罪的法益侵害與責任非難是否產生影響。在界定黨紀政紀與國法的聯繫與區別、明確受賄罪的法益是國家工作人員職務行為的不可收買性而非廉潔性的前提下，應該認為，“為他人謀取利益”是受賄罪中的違法要素。並且，在默契受賄和一部分收受禮金的場合，“為他人謀取利益”表現為默示的具體或者概括性承諾，屬於主觀違法要素；在事後受賄的場合，“為他人謀取利益”則是純粹的客觀違法要素。混合違法要素說既可以找到理論先例和立法佐證，也可以通過對刑法第385條的解釋獲得說明。混合違法要素說能夠對2016年最新司法解釋相關規定給出合理說明，並且為實務中一些疑難問題的處理提供指導。

On the systematic status of 'securing benefits for another' in the passive acceptance of bride, there are the fundamental opposition between objective element theory and subjective element theory. And the so-called new objective element theory, which demands at least the existence of promise, belongs to the subjective theory in essence. Traditional objective theory has obvious drawbacks like tending to lead penal loopholes, while the subjective theory is impotent to deal with the circumstances like post factum bribery. Compared with the formalized question whether 'securing benefits for another' belongs to the objective element or subjective element, it is more reasonable to make a detailed inquiry about whether 'securing benefits for another' has an influence on the harmed legal interests and imputability of bribery crime. 'Securing benefits for another' should be regarded as an illegal element of the crime of acceptance of bribes, on the premise that defines the relation and distinction between party and administrative discipline and law as well as the legal interest of the crime of acceptance of bribes is un-purchasing rather than the integrity of public service of state functionaries. Meanwhile, in terms of tacit acceptance of? bribes and partly acceptance of gifts an payments, 'securing benefits for another person' is expressed in implied specific or general commitment, which belongs to subjective element of illegality; in terms of post factum bribery, 'securing benefits for another person' is a purely objective element of illegality. Both theoretical precedent and legislative evidence can be quoted to prove mixed elements of illegality, which can also explained by interpretation of Article 385 of the Criminal Law. Mixed elements of illegality can provide a reasonable explanation for relevant provisions of the latest judicial interpretation in 2016, and provide guidance for handling of some complex issues in practice.