关于共犯的处罚根据,历来存在因果共犯论、违法共犯论与责任共犯论的争论,但后两种理论必将导出处罚所有的必要共犯之结论,因而是不妥当的。因果性才是共犯论的逻辑出发点,但是共犯的因果关系并不像单独犯的因果关系那样严格要求“没有前者就没有后者”这一条件,而只需要物理性或心理性地促使正犯结果更容易实现即为足够。因此,在认定共犯的成立与脱离以及中止时,物理性因果关系与心理性因果关系的存在与否成为问题的关键。但作为其前提,有必要明晰“共犯”这个概念,在这一点上,犯罪共同说与行为共同说提供了不同的思考进路。为了避免陷入心情刑法的危险,有必要为共犯处罚划定界限,而这一界限的划定,应当结合形式标准与实质标准。形式标准指的是共犯对正犯的最小从属性,而实质标准指的是根据共同行为人的行为个别性地认定是否存在防止结果发生的注意义务。 There has always been a debate on the basis of penalties for accomplice on the theory of causality, the theory of a total breach of guilty and the theory of a total liability, but the latter two theories are bound to lead to the conclusion that all necessary co-sanctions should be punished. Therefore, it is not proper. Causality is the logical starting point for the theory of accomplice. However, the causal relationship of accomplice is not as strict as the causal relationship of solitary conviction. The condition of “without the former and without the latter” only needs to be physically or psychologically motivated It is enough if the result of the principal offense is easier to achieve. Therefore, the existence of physical causal relationship and psychological causal relationship is the crux of the problem when establishing the establishment and disengagement of the accomplice and suspending it. However, as a prerequisite, it is necessary to clarify the concept of “accomplice.” At this point, the common thread of crime and conduct together provide a different way of thinking. In order to avoid the danger of falling into the criminal law of the mood, it is necessary to punish the criminals for delineation of boundaries. The delineation of this boundary should combine the formal standards with the substantive ones. Formal standards refer to the minimum subordination of accomplices to a guilty conscientious object, while substantive standards refer to the individual cognizance of the duty of care to prevent consequences from being based on the behavior of the co-perpetrator.