交通肇事后的报警行为不成立自首之法理抉微

《刑法》第133条规定的逻辑结构决定了如若将交通肇事者肇事后报警并保护事故现场的行为认定为自首，将违反刑法禁止重复评价原则。通过与交通肇事罪同质的其他过失犯罪的法定刑配置对比，可得出交通肇事罪的基本法定刑适用情形中包含了肇事者报警并保护事故现场的内容之结论。其他法律、法规为肇事者设定自首义务有其心理学基础且契合作为法的整体精神。肇事者逃逸后又自动投案并如实供述自己罪行的成立本罪之自首。

On Reporting to the Police after Traffic Accident being not Voluntary Surrender

According to the logical structure stipulated by the Article 133 of penal code, the act, which the traffic troublemaker would call the police and keep the scene after the accident occurs, being asserted to be voluntary surrender, violates the prohibiting repeatable evaluation of penal code. Compared with statutory penalty allocation of other negligent crimes which have the same feature of the traffic offence, the basic statutory penalty allocation of traffic offence includes the troublemaker calling the police and keeping the scene. Undoubtedly, it is reasonable that other legislations set the obligation of voluntary surrender for troublemakers, and it does not violate the nature of criminal law, too. After the accident occurs, if troublemaker appears before court voluntarily, and declares in a confession truthfully, his action shall be regarded as voluntary surrender