論必要共犯的可罰性

On the Punishability of Necessary Accomplices

必要共同犯罪中的必要共犯行為是否可罰存在立法者意思說和實質說等觀點的分歧，我國司法實務對此也持不盡一致的立場。實務與學理圍繞必要共犯可罰性的紛爭背後，其實是形式還是實質地理解必要共同犯罪條款的對立。依據反對解釋和當然解釋等形式地理解立法者意思的解釋路徑，雖然在不少場合能得出合理的答案，但可罰與否不應該只是一個形式邏輯的推論問題；大多數實質說則沉浸於違法性和責任等有無的迷思，而忽略了從違法性和責任的程度角度考察必要共犯的可罰性。對於必要共犯行為，應當在比例原則的制約下，結合各構成要件的規範目的，分為離心型犯罪、向心型犯罪等不同類型，具體地判斷其可罰性之有無。

There are many different opinions about whether the necessary accomplice of necessary joint crime is punishable, such as the theory of lawmaker's concept and the theory of law's essence. And the judicial practice in our country has also different positions. Behind the practice and theoiy about necessary accomplice is actually a formal or an essential understanding of necessary joint crime clause. Even though in many occasions we can reasonably come to the answer by formal understanding of lawmaker's concept, but the punishability should not be just a question of formal logic reasoning. Most part of the theory of law's essence immersed in unlawfulness and guilt and ignored to study the punishability of necessary accomplice from the perspective of the degree of unlawfulness and guilt. The punishability of necessary accomplice shall be under the control of proportional principle, based on the constitutive elements of crime, divided into centrifugal crime and centripetal crime and so on, and concretely analysed.