论文部分内容阅读
一、序言平成7年,千叶地方裁判所审理了这样一起案件:行为人在赛车场进行越野赛车的练习,被害人是有7年赛车经验的教练,被害人坐在副驾驶的位置指导行为人开车,在被害人的指导下,行为人使用了未曾使用过的驾驶技术行车,结果引发事故,导致被害人死亡。法院认为,行为人的驾驶方法以及被害人之死亡结果是被害人接受的危险的现实化,并且行为人的行为也不欠缺社会相当性,因而否定行为人成立业务上的过失致死罪。[1]在此判决后,围绕着过失致死伤罪,激烈地讨论着这样的问题:当被害人参与危险行为并促成结果发生时,对于制造危险或者是促进被害人实施危险行为的行为人,在什么条件下可以免除罪责。
I. Preamble In 1997, Chiba Prefecture Magistrates’ Court examined one such case: the perpetrator practiced off-road racing at the race course, the victim was a coach with seven years of racing experience, and the victim was instructed to sit in the position of the co-pilot to drive, Under the guidance of the victim, the perpetrator used unused driving skills to drive the car, resulting in an accident that killed the victim. The court held that the driver’s driving method and the victim’s death result were the reality of the danger accepted by the victim and that the behavior of the actor was not lacking in social equivalence, thus denying the perpetrator the crime of negligent death in business. [1] Following this judgment, the issue of lethal fatalities surrounding negligence is heatedly debated on the question of what the perpetrator of a dangerous act or conduct of a dangerous act when involved in a dangerous act and contributed to the outcome, Conditions can be exempt from guilt.