歸責負擔與刑法不法

歸責理論在我國刑法教義學中的發展日益深入，對推動刑法不法內涵的規範化起到重要作用。但是，歸責與不法究竟處於怎樣的關係，歸責引入的規範視角到底是如何注入不法判斷的，以及在罪刑法定原則的視野之下，歸責與不法的關係又該如何自處等問題其實仍然有待分析。透過引入源於私法領域的負擔與義務之分，可以發現厘清歸責與不法關係的蹊徑，即負擔決定歸責，義務決定不法，二者雖處於緊密融合之中，但仍然是兩種不同的判斷，不容混淆。區分歸責負擔與刑法不法，對解決原因自由行為、超越承擔過失、防衛挑撥、自陷風險、著手、實行、被害人教義學以及共同犯罪等一系列問題有啟發意義。在刑法中引入負擔理念與《刑法》第22條預備犯的規定不衝突，也不會導致刑法的私法化，應當在刑法不法的判斷中一般性地提倡歸責負擔理念。

The development of the theory of imputation in Chinese criminal law doctrine is getting deeper and deeper, and it plays an important role in promoting the normalization of criminal unlawfulness. However, the relationship between imputation and unlawfulness is still to be analyzed. Through the introduction of the distinction between duty and obligation originating from the private law field, we can find a way to clarify the relationship between imputation and unlawfulness, that is, the obligation determines imputation and the duty determines unlawfulness, which are in a close fusion, but still two different judgments. Distinguishing the obligation of imputation and criminal unlawfulness is a good inspiration for solving a series of problems, such as actio libera in causa, negligence of undertaking, defense provocation, self-inflicted risk, enforcement, commencement, victim doctrine and joint crime. The introduction of the concept of obligation in criminal law does not conflict with the provisions of Article 22 of the Criminal Law on preparatory offences, nor does it lead to the privatization of criminal law, and the concept of obligation should be advocated in general in the judgment of criminal unlawfulness.