论刑法上因果关系的判断标准

On the Criteria for Determining Causation in Criminal Law

The lack of unified criteria for determining causal relationships in Chinese criminal law has resulted in weak reasoning in judicial decisions, confusion in liability attribution, and inconsistent judgments in similar cases. The theory of conditional cause and effect, the theory of adequate causation, and the theory of objective imputation all have their own problems. With the core concept of decisive contributory force, the theory of danger realization achieves a transition from factual judgment to normative judgment, upholds the objectivity of causal relationships, is relatively simple in judgment, and is more in line with China's criminal offense composition system. Under the guidance of the theory of danger realization, the inherent real danger of the act is presented through a categorized model. Based on the three categories of independent, concurrent, and progressive danger, it is judged whether the behavior internally contains a highly threatening state of the legal interest pointed to by the result. Then, the decisive contributory force is compared according to the different causal processes of danger realization, and from the three perspectives of single-outbreak, concurrent-outbreak, and inducement-outbreak, it is judged whether the danger created by the act has been transformed into a harmful result.

我国刑法上因果关系的判断标准未统一造成了实务中裁判说理性不强、责任归属混乱、同案不同判的现象，条件说、相当因果关系说、客观归责理论均存在问题。以贡献力为核心，危险现实化说实现了事实判断到规范判断的跨越，坚持了因果关系的客观性，判断较为简易，更加契合我国犯罪构成体系。在危险现实化说的指导下，将实行行为内在的现实危险性以分类模型方式呈现，根据独立式、并合式、递进式危险类别判断行为是否内含结果所指向的法益的高度威胁状态；再根据危险实现的因果流程的不同进行贡献力的比较，从单发型、并发型和诱发型视角判断实行行为之危险是否现实化为结果。