作者：吴镝飞
作者介绍：中国政法大学刑事司法学院讲师，法学博士
出版日期：2025年8月9日
内容提要 但书规定的出罪功能既不违反罪刑法定原则的价值旨趣，又能满足不具备处罚必要性情形的出罪需要，可以在“不构成犯罪”与“不认为是犯罪”两个路径上展开。“入罪限制条件说”重视犯罪构成是犯罪成立的唯一标准，却忽视了但书规定的独立意义，容易造成理论与实践的脱节；“出罪标准说”实现了出罪的合理性，但是可能存在出罪标准模糊、容易被滥用的问题。基于但书规定在出罪体系中的重要性，需要以统合视角适用但书规定限缩犯罪成立范围。但书规定的出罪功能首先体现为指导构成要件的实质解释，充任不法程度判断的规范指引。在实质解释难以满足出罪需要时，发挥但书规定的规范填补作用，基于行为人因素或行为人外因素的考量以“不认为是犯罪”出罪。
关键词 但书规定 出罪功能 统合路径 规范指引 规范填补
Abstract: The exoneration function of the proviso is not contrary to the value essence of the principle of legality, and meets the need for exoneration in the absence of the necessity of punishment, which can be divided into the following two perspectives: ‘not constituting a crime’ and ‘not considered as a crime’. The theory of the restrictive conditions for crimination emphasizes on the constitution of a crime as the sole criterion for the establishment of the crime, but overlooks the independent significance of the proviso, prone to result in a disconnection between theory and practice. The theory of the criteria of exoneration rationalizes the exoneration, but there is a suspicion that the criteria are vague and open to abuse. In consideration of the importance of the proviso in the system of exoneration, it is necessary to apply the proviso to narrow the scope of the constitution of a crime in an integrated mode. The exoneration function of the proviso is first and foremost to guide the substantive interpretation of constituent elements, playing a role as the normative guideline in the determination of the degree of illegality. Where the substantive interpretation fails to meet the need for exoneration, based on the factors related to or other than the actor, the proviso exonerates the actor on the grounds of ‘not considered as a crime’, playing a normative supplementary role.