合流与分野:论刑法与侵权法上的事实因果关系

刑法中的因果关系的确立以行为人责任为中心,侵权法中因果关系的建立以填补损失为要旨,二者机能不同,这在事实因果的判断中有所渗透。事实因果以条件说为核心命题,进而产生了基于其缺陷的各种修正学说,在侵权法与刑法领域不尽相同。表述修正说可以解决假定因果关系、择一因果关系问题。原因说可以区分"条件"与"原因",缩小打击面,主要在刑法领域得以适用。NESS标准能够妥善解决赔偿责任分担问题,不得任意扩张到刑法领域。协同行动方法、确信概率说本质上系因果关系推定问题,不能渗透入刑法,疫学因果关系应当被否定。刑法与侵权法中的因果关系认定大相径庭,不可混同。

Confluence and Distinction:Criminal Law and Tort Law on the Relationship of Factual Causality

The establishment of causality in Criminal Law centers on the responsibility of the conduct, while the Tort Law sets filling the loss as the keystone. Two different functions as they are, they infiltrate in factual causality judgment. Factual causality is the core proposition of the condition, and then produces a variety of correction theory based on its defects, which is not the same in the field of Tort Law and Criminal Law. The formulation of the modified hypothesis can solve the problem of the assumption of causality and the selection of a cause and effect relationship. Reasons that can be distinguished from the “conditions” and “reasons”, to narrow the field of criticizing, and it is mainly applied in the field of Criminal Law. NESS standards are able to properly resolve the issue of compensation liability, shall not be arbitrarily expanded into the field of criminal law. Collaborative action method, the belief that the causal relationship between the probability theory that the inference problem, cannot penetrate into the criminal law, the epidemic cause and effect relationship should be denied. It is quite a different identification of causal relationship between Criminal Law and Tort Law and may not to be confused.