对于紧急救助型偶然防卫,在英美刑法中,“行为论”侧重行为的实效,采未遂说;“原因论”侧重对行为人主观意识的考察,采既遂说。大陆法系学者在探讨偶然防卫时一般将其置于防卫意识的必要与否之中进行研究,主要有基于行为无价值论的防卫意思必要说和基于结果无价值论的防卫意思不要说。然而,由于司法实践中偶然防卫案件的小概率性,理论上对其研究面临形式逻辑上无意义的危险。同时,对于偶然防卫者主观动机评价的技术性回避,使得基于行为功利主义对偶然防卫所进行的探讨仍然存在许多质疑,尚需商榷。 For emergency rescue accidental defense, in Anglo-American criminal law, “behavior theory ” focuses on the actual effect of the act, and attempts are not made; “cause theory ” focuses on the investigation of the subjective consciousness of the perpetrator. In the course of discussing contingency defense, scholars of continental law generally put it in the necessity or not of defense awareness. There are mainly the meaning of defense based on the actionlessness theory and the defense based on the resultlessness theory. However, due to the small probability of occasional defense cases in judicial practice, its research theoretically faces the danger of being formally logically meaningless. At the same time, the technical avoidance of the subjective motivation evaluation of contingent defenders makes the discussion based on behavioral utilitarianism on occasional defenses still have many questions that are still to be discussed.