預備行為實行化的立法根據與解釋規則

預備行為實行化是立法者為了前置刑事處罰的範圍而採取的重要立法手段。目前學界對其罪名範圍的界定較為混亂，而且還存在著泛化理解的趨勢。為了合理界定其範圍，必須深入考察其立法目的。預備行為實行化屬預防性刑法觀的表現形式，它更強調的是預備行為引發後續犯罪的風險。立法者採取這一立法模式，具有填補處罰漏洞與減輕控方證明責任的功能。據此，分則中許多罪名都屬表像的預備行為實行化，應予以排除。以是否獨立保護中間法益為標準，可以將預備行為實行化區分為法益前置型與提前處罰型兩類，其中法益前置型需要充分發揮阻擋層法益的解釋功能，在此基礎上，再用背後層法益進行二次限縮；而提前處罰型除了要判斷預備行為對法益的抽象危險，還需要審查其與後續實行行為的關聯性，以此來明確處罰範圍。

The criminalization of preparatory acts constitutes a significant legislative technique employed by legislators to advance the scope of criminal punishment. Currently, academic discourse exhibits considerable confusion regarding the definition of the scope of preparatory acts, alongside a trend towards overly broad interpretation, which warrants critical re-examination. To rationally define its boundaries, it is necessary to thoroughly examine the legislative purpose. The criminalization of preparatory acts embodies a preventive criminal law philosophy, emphasizing the risk that preparatory acts pose of instigating subsequent offenses. By adopting this legislative model, legislators can fill in the gaps in punishment and relieve the prosecution's burden of proof. Consequently, many criminal charges are merely conform to the characteristics of substantive preparatory acts and should be excluded. Using the independent protection of an intermediate legal interest as a criterion, the criminalization of preparatory acts can be categorized into two types: advance protection of legal interests and early punishment. For the advance protection type, the interpretative function of the barrier-layer legal interest must be fully utilized, and then the back-layer legal interest should be used for secondary limitation. For the early punishment type, beyond assessing the abstract risk posed by the preparatory act to the legal interest, it is also necessary to examine its connection to the subsequent act of execution, thereby clarifying the scope of punishment.