水污染犯罪与其它自然犯罪一样具有反社会性和反道德性，而且具有危害隐蔽性、影响广泛性、专门技术性、代际传递性等特性。为更好规制水污染犯罪，本文立足法益保护的立场，择取法教义学体系中法益、责任、刑罚三大范畴作为行文内在论域，着重考察水污染犯罪危险犯设置相关问题。 首先，正文在第一部分提出问题。通过对水污染犯罪典型案例及宏观数据的分析，提出为更好地保护法益，需厘清水污染犯罪保护法益类型、设置何种犯罪既遂形态保护法益、运用何种刑罚措施保护法益等问题。其次，正文在第二部分论述污染环境罪法益保护现状及对生态法益的保护困境。通过对污染环境罪立法沿革的分析及相关理论的梳理，得出刑法法益观已向生态转向，应认可独立的生态法益价值。污染环境罪及其司法解释应保护个人生命、健康、财产利益，并保护与此相关的生态系统维持。以此体现刑法功能性与自然法公民生存平等权。由于水污染犯罪的特殊性，生态法益保护面临行刑衔接难题及刑事处罚困境，为下文引入危险犯做出铺垫。再次，正文在第三部分对水污染犯罪危险犯设置进行价值分析。通过对风险刑法相关观点及例证的归纳、比较与总结，表明设置危险犯体现风险控制及积极预防的刑法立场，有利于对犯罪人归责，有利于保护生态法益及实现刑罚特殊预防目的。同时针对刑法过度扩张侵袭个人自由的隐忧，在小结中提出刑事法应坚持谦抑的法益保护原则，主要设置具体危险犯，个别设置抽象危险犯，并明确区分危险犯既遂与未遂标准。最后，正文在第四部分提出水污染犯罪危险犯的设置路径。结合上部分论述的水污染犯罪应合理设置危险犯来更好保护法益的观点，提出应明确危险犯的危险标准应包括生态环境危险，明确具体危险犯的行为类型及主观罪过。由于水污染犯罪大多为法人实施，故应完善利于刑罚功能发挥的配套措施，即在前置法中完善水污染行政法规；在刑事程序法中确定公益诉讼起诉主体并合理分配证明责任，完善检察机关提起公益诉讼制度；在刑罚施行中根据具体情形适用非刑罚处罚措施来平衡犯罪人与被害人利益，以此体现刑罚作为保护法益手段的理性。

Compared with other natural crimes, water pollution crime also has antisocial and anti-morals character, and it has the features of harm concealment, extensive influence, special technical, and intergenerational transmission. For the reason of crime control, based on the standpoint of legal interests protection, this paper choose the three categories of legal interest, responsibility and penalty in the doctrinal system of law as the inner frame of writing. This paper focuses on the problems related to the establishment of dangerous crimes. First, the text raises questions in the first part. Through the analysis of typical cases and macroscopic data of water pollution crime ,this paper puts forward that we should clarify the protection law benefit of the water pollution crime, set up what kind of crime to protect the law benefit and what kind of penal measures to protect the law benefit .Secondly, in the second part, the text discusses the current situation of legal benefit protection and the predicament of protecting ecological legal benefits. Through the analysis of the legislation evolution of the crime of polluting environment and the related theories, it is concluded that the legal interest of criminal law has turned to ecology, the crime of polluting the environment and its judicial interpretation should protect individual legal interests and ecological legal benefits. This represents the function of criminal law and the right of the citizens to exist. Because of the particularity of water pollution crime, the paper puts forward that the protection of ecological legal benefit is confronted with the problem of the connection of the legal system and the lack reason of criminal punishment . Thirdly, The author in the third part think the water pollution crime should set up dangerous crime and clarify the value of this. By summarizing and comparing the relevant viewpoints and examples of risk criminal law, it shows that the standpoint of dangerous crime, which embodies the risk control and active prevention, is beneficial to the imputation of crime person, is advantageous to protect the ecological law benefit and the special prevention goal of the penalty, and embodies the function of the criminal law as the social management tool. At the same time, the paper puts forward that criminal law should adhere to the principle of legal benefit protection, mainly setting up specific dangerous criminals, and setting up abstract dangerous criminals individually. Finally, the text in the fourth part set the path of the water pollution risk crime. It is suggested that the dangerous standard should include the ecological environment danger, clarifying the behavior type and subjective fault of the specific dangerous crime. At the same time, because of the unit crime is the significant of water pollution crime, we should perfect the supporting measures to elevate the function of penalty. That is perfecting the administrative regulation of water pollution as the former law, In the Criminal Procedure law to determine the main body of public interest litigation and reasonable distribution of burden of proof, to balance the interests of the offender and the victim in the execution of penalty by applying the non-penalty measures and the criminal reconciliation .We should use less penalty measures and the criminal reconciliation to balance the interests between the offender and the victim, and realize the goal of penalty prevention.