The problems related to self-insurance risk of the aggrieved party originate from Germany in the last century, which is a typical continental lagal system problem. In countries of continental lagal system like Germany and Japan, researches on the problem are relatively mature with a number of research achievements. As for mainland China, the problem was introduced in 2006, for which the problem remains in the initial stage with little achievements compared with traditional countries of continental lagal system like Germany and Japan. As for some fields, there is even nobody showing any interest in. Through the following parts, the problem will be arranged and demonstrated in this paper. In the introduction, three classic cases including the Memel Case, the Heroin Injection Case and the Racing Coach Case in Germany and Japan are mainly elaborated, through which the debate focus of the problem related to self-insurance risk of the aggrieved party is obtained. On this basis, the representative research achievements in this field in mainland China are reviewed. In the first chapter, through stating the differences between self-insurance risk and unity of the aggrieved party and macroscopically analyzing the two situations of self-insurance risk occasion of the aggrieved party, the essential prerequisites that the occasion of self-insurance risk of the aggrieved party is established are obtained, which straighten up the limitation of this paper. The crime problem of perpetrator under the self-insurance risk occasion that is being discussed most heatedly in the problem related to self-insurance risk of the aggrieved party is dicussed. After analyzing main representative theories like theory of subordinateness of accomplices, negative theory of behavioral risk, victim doctrine and victim self-responsibility theory, the standpoint of this paper is proposed. Under self-danger situations, it is favorable to refer to the explanation in the logic of subordinateness of accomplices that perpetrator should not be responsible for the actual damage results under this situation; however, based on the situation of' perceived risk, if the perpetrator's behavior is consistent with the specific elements of the crime without existence of indirect guilt, the perpetrator should be responsible for the actual damage results. Finally, in the third chapter, from the two perspectives of traditional countries of continental lagal system and mainland China, the orientation of the problem related to self-insurance risk of the aggrieved party in the crime constitution system is elaborated. As a result, the problem in Germany orientates in “appropriateness” while that in Japan orientates in “illegality". As for mainland China that uses four elements, the problem should be considered in "object of crime". Key words: self-insurance risk of the aggrieved party, risk acceptance of the aggrieved party, imputation principle, crime constitution system

被害人自陷風險的相關問題脫胎於上個世紀的德國，是一個典型的大陸法系問題。因此對於這一問題的研究，在德、日本等大陸法系國家之中，對此的研究也相對成熟，也有有较多的研究成果。而對於中内地，这一題是 2006 年才被引入，因此相較於德國、日本等傳统大陸法系國家而言仍然處於起步階段，成果也寥寥無幾，於對一些領域甚至無人問津。本文透過一下幾個部分對於這問题進行梳理與論述。 在引言部分，主要闡述了在德國與日本發生的三個經典案件(梅梅爾河案、海洛因注射案以及赛車指導案)並透過理這三個案例的判決得出學界對於被害人自陷風險相關問题的爭論焦點。在此基礎上回顧了中國内地在此領域的代表性研究成果。其後本文透過論述被害人自陷風險與被害人同意兩者間的差異以及宏觀分析被害人自陷風險場合的兩種情況從而得出了被害人自陷風險這一場合成立的必要前提條件，為全文的論述厘清界限。隨後，本文則開始討論關於被害人自陷風險相關問題中被討論的最為激烈的，被害人自陷風險場合下行為人的出罪問题，在分析完共犯從屬性說、行為危險性否定說、被害人信條學以及被害人自我答責理論等具有代表性的主流學說後，提出了文本的觀點。本文認為，在自已危險化的情况下宜借鑒共犯從屬性的邏辑内核解釋行為人在此情况下不應對實害結果負責；但是在基於合意危險化的情況下，行為人的行為如若符合具體的犯罪構成要件，而又不存在例外情形的，應對實害結果負責。最後，本文以傳统大陸法系國家以及中國内地这兩個角度在被害人自陷風險相關問題在犯罪成體系中的定位進行論述，得出在德國該問题定位於在“該當性”，而在日本則定位在“違法性”。對於使用四要件的中國内地，則在“犯罪的客體”中對此進行思考。 關鍵字：被害人自陷風險，被害人危險接受，歸責原理，犯罪構成體系