论文部分内容阅读
在皮革喷雾剂案中,德国联邦最高院回避条件公式转用反向排除法推导产品致害原因性的论证并不妥当,一般因果法则作为具体因果关系的必要部分,是无可绕开的待证事实,其合法则性与否取决于经验科学的能力以及法学自身的接受标准。其次,通过危险前行为的“违反义务性”得出公司董事的保证人地位会导致“法所不允许的危险”的外延限制被不合逻辑地消解,对此,理论上可从其他角度获得解决保证人地位的方案。最后,公司集体表决的程序框架则为董事投票与结果发生之间的因果关系的确定提供了合法则性。中国刑法对于单位犯罪的双罚制虽然免去了德国法院试图将产品责任归责个人化中遭遇的说理困难,但是追求刑法解释教义精确化的努力能够更好地形成风险社会中对公民行为的指引。
In the case of leather sprays, the argument that the formula of the avoidance of the German Federal Supreme Court turned to the reverse elimination method to deduce the cause of the product harm was not proper. The general law of causality is an indispensable part of the concrete causation Proof of the fact that its legitimacy or not depends on the ability of empirical science and law of their own acceptance criteria. Second, finding the guarantor’s position as a director of a company through pre-dangerous behavior leads to an illogical removal of the “extension of the danger of impermissibility” by the law From the perspective of obtaining a solution to the guarantor’s status. Finally, the procedural framework of the company’s collective vote provides legitimacy for the determination of the causal link between the voting of the directors and the outcome. Although the double punishment system of Chinese criminal law on unit crime exempts the German court from trying to personalize product liability, the pursuit of the precise interpretation of doctrine of criminal law can better form a model of behavior of civil society in risk society Guidelines.