《刑法修正案（九）》第8条修正后的1997年系统修订的《刑法》第133条之一第2款规定，机动车所有人、管理人对于超载超速类的危险驾驶行为和违规运输危险化学品类的危险驾驶行为，负有直接责任的，依照危险驾驶罪的规定处罚。本款内容规定得十分简单，并未对机动车所有人、管理人承担的刑事责任予以明确描述，因而留下了巨大的解释空间，这可能会导致在司法适用时缺乏可操作性。因此，有必要对危险驾驶罪中机动车所有人、管理人所承担的刑事责任问题从形式到实质进行尽可能详尽的分析。全文共分为四个部分，共计6.2万余字。 首先，根据注意性规定还是法律拟制的特征后可知，如果机动车所有人、管理人承担的刑事责任是故意犯罪的责任，那么本规定就是注意性规定；如果机动车所有人、管理人承担的是过失犯罪的责任，那么本规定就属于法律拟制。因此，有必要结合本规定的具体内容先从体系论上对故意犯与过失犯成立的各种可能性加以探讨。其次，笔者以罪过形式作为划分刑事责任类型的标准来探讨机动车所有人、管理人的刑事责任类型。一方面，在故意责任中，笔者在梳理其体系位置变迁和基本内容的基础上，具体分析了在本规定的内容中，成立故意犯需要怎样的事实性认识、违法性认识与意志要素；另一方面，在过失责任中笔者亦是在梳理过失论理论演化的基础上，分析出在本规定内容中可能存在的过失乃是监督过失，并解析了监督过失的概念与特征，强调其仍属于过失犯的基本类型——疏忽大意型过失和过失自信型过失的范围，确立了以新过失论的体系来分析本规定中可能存在的过失责任的方法论进路；最后，否定了所谓的“故意-过失”责任存在的可能性，因为在本规定的形式下所谓的“故意-过失”责任会违背罪刑法定原则的明确性要求。再次，就机动车所有人、管理人的刑事责任根据问题而言。一方面，在客观依据方面，第一，就行为主体而言，机动车管理人、所有人只能是自然人，不能与机动车驾驶员重合，并且对于机动车驾驶员具有现实性的优势地位和影响力；第二，就实行行为而言，机动车所有人、管理人涉及构成“校车业务或旅客运输业务超载超速”类或“违规运输危险化学品”类危险驾驶犯罪时的行为起码在事实层面与驾驶员的“直接”危险驾驶行为形成了一种“配合”关系，而行为方式则包括作为与不作为；第三，就构成要件所要求的危险结果而言，超载超速类危险驾驶罪的成立需要具备抽象危险，而违规运输危险化学品类危险驾驶罪的成立则需要危及公共安全的具体危险；第四，就因果关系而言，对于故意犯应采取相当因果关系理论加以确定，对于过失犯则应该以客观归责理论加以限定；第五，结合《道路交通安全法》和《危险物品监督管理条例》等前置性法律法规的内容分析了机动车驾驶员的相关资格与行为内容，得出“违规运输危险化学品”类危险驾驶犯罪乃是真正的身份犯的结论。另一方面，就主观依据而言，本文主要探讨在本规定下成立故意犯需要的认识内容、认识程度与意志要素，以及在成立过失犯中又是如违反主观注意义务的。接下来，笔者主要分析机动车所有人、管理人的刑事责任范围问题，即复数主体参与犯罪的问题。第一，就共同犯罪的参与形式，本文在结合我国立法现状与共犯从属性原理的应然之义的基础上具体厘清了成立教唆犯与成立帮助犯时应承担何种程度的刑事责任；第二，就间接正犯的参与形式，本文在肯定犯罪事实上支配理论的基础上，具体分析了机动车所有人、管理人需要满足怎样的条件才能形成对驾驶员的意思支配，继而形成单独犯的刑事责任。第三，在过失犯的参与形式中，本文结合监督过失的行为特点，详尽探讨了在单独犯的情形下应当如何适用相当因果关系和客观归责理论，以辨析出其在驾驶员的实行行为介入后，是否仍对构成要件结果负担刑事责任。最后，在结论部分，对本规定的内容在体系论层面进行学理解释时，故意责任与过失责任都有存在的空间。因而，过渡到价值论的层面，结合立法的经济性问题、我国宽严相济的刑事政策、风险社会的特点以及预防刑法观的要求，可以得出最终结论，即本款所规定的机动车所有人、管理人的刑事责任主要是指是监督过失责任，也包括故意责任，因而本规定在性质上即属于法律拟制，又属于注意性规定。

Paragraph 2 of Article 133 of the Criminal Law, which was amended by Article 8 of the Criminal Law Amendment (9), provides for dangerous driving behavior and illegal transportation of overloaded super-speed vehicles by motor vehicle owners and administrators. In the case of dangerous driving behaviors of dangerous chemicals, if they are directly responsible, they shall be punished according to the provisions of dangerous driving offences. The content of this paragraph is very simple and does not clearly describe the criminal liability of motor vehicle owners and managers, thus leaving a huge room for interpretation, which may lead to lack of maneuverability in the application of justice. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the criminal liability of motor vehicle owners and managers in dangerous driving as much as possible from the form to the essence. The full text is divided into four parts, totaling more than 52,000 words. First of all, according to the characteristics of the rules of attention or the characteristics of the law, if the criminal responsibility of the owner and manager of the motor vehicle is the responsibility of intentional crime, then this regulation is the attentional provision; if the owner and manager of the motor vehicle bear It is the responsibility of negligent crimes, then this provision is legally drafted. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss the various possibilities of the establishment of intentional and negligent criminals from the system theory in combination with the specific content of this regulation. Secondly, the author uses the form of sin as a criterion for classifying criminal liability to explore the types of criminal liability of motor vehicle owners and managers. On the one hand, in the intentional responsibility, on the basis of sorting out the changes and basic contents of the system, the author specifically analyzes the factual cognition, illegal understanding and will elements needed to establish the intentional offense in the content of this regulation; On the one hand, in the fault liability, the author analyzes the possible faults in the content of this regulation on the basis of the evolution of the theory of negligence, and analyzes the concept and characteristics of supervision fault, emphasizing that it still belongs to The basic types of negligent crimes—the scope of negligence-type negligence and negligence-confident negligence—establish a methodological approach to analyze the negligence liability that may exist in this provision by the system of new negligence; finally, the so-called “intentional” is denied. - The possibility of liability for negligence, because the so-called "intentional-negligent" liability in the form of this provision would violate the clear requirements of the statutory principle of the crime. Thirdly, the criminal responsibility of the owner and manager of the motor vehicle is based on the problem. On the one hand, in terms of objective basis, firstly, in terms of the subject of the act, the motor vehicle manager and the owner can only be natural persons, cannot overlap with the driver of the motor vehicle, and have a realistic advantage for the motor vehicle driver and Secondly, as far as the conduct is concerned, the motor vehicle owners and managers are involved in the crimes of “dangerous driving crimes of “school bus business or passenger transportation business overloading” or “illegal transportation of dangerous chemicals”. The level forms a “coordination” relationship with the driver’s “direct” dangerous driving behavior, and the behavior includes actions and omissions. Third, in terms of the dangerous results required to constitute the requirements, the overloaded speeding dangerous driving crime The establishment of the need to have an abstract hazard, and the establishment of dangerous driving offences for the dangerous transport of dangerous chemicals requires specific risks that endanger public safety. Fourth, as far as the causality are concerned, deliberate offenders should be determined by a theory of causality. It should be limited by objective imputation theory; fifth, combined with the Road Traffic Safety Law and Supervision and Regulation of dangerous goods "content pre laws and regulations and other relevant qualifications analyzed motor vehicle driver's behavior and content, produce the" dangerous classes illegal transportation of dangerous chemicals "but the true identity of the driver of crime committed conclusions. On the other hand, in terms of subjective basis, this article mainly discusses the content of cognition, the degree of cognition and the will of the intention to establish deliberate offenses under this regulation, and the violation of subjective duty of care in the establishment of a perpetrator. Next, the author mainly analyzes the scope of criminal responsibility of motorists and managers, that is, the problem of plural subjects participating in crimes. First, with regard to the form of participation in joint crimes, this paper clarifies the degree of criminal responsibility for the establishment of abettors and the establishment of helpers on the basis of combining the current situation of legislation in China with the principle of the accomplice from the principle of property; Second, on the basis of the form of participation in indirect criminals, this paper analyzes the conditions of the de facto criminal domination theory, and specifically analyzes what conditions the motor vehicle owners and managers need to meet in order to form a dominant control of the driver, and then form a separate crime. criminal responsibility. Thirdly, in the form of participation of negligent criminals, this paper discusses in detail how to apply the theory of causality and objective imputation in the case of individual crimes in order to distinguish its behavior in the driver's behavior. After the intervention, whether it is still criminally responsible for the results of the constituent elements. Finally, in the conclusion part, when the content of this regulation is theoretically explained at the system level, there is room for intentional responsibility and fault liability. Therefore, the transition to the level of value theory, combined with the economic problems of legislation, the criminal policy of tempering justice with strictness, the characteristics of risk society and the requirements of preventing criminal law, can draw the final conclusion, that is, the motor vehicle owner stipulated in this paragraph The criminal liability of the administrator mainly refers to the responsibility for supervising the fault, and also includes the intentional liability. Therefore, the provisions of this regulation are legally drafted and are also the prescriptive provisions.