摘要： 不作为在共同犯罪中的参与形式不能简单地按照作为犯的分工方式进行区分，这是因为不作为在存在结构上与作为有着本质的差异。不作为必须与作为犯在构成要件上具有等价性，才有可能在共同犯罪中成立正犯，这种等价值性不能用传统的因果关系说和形式的保证人说加以说明。在对保证人说确立的形式的保证人义务进行实质解释的学说中，应采用基于不作为对结果的事实性支配来确定不真正不作为的成立，除此之外，违反功能性的保证人义务也补充性地成为不作为正犯的标准。不作为的正犯性正是建立在此两种标准的基础之上。

关键词: 不真正不作为犯, 等价性, 事实支配, 功能性保证人义务

Abstract: Determining criminal omission to be a principal offender or a participant in complicity crime should not follow the rules of commission, because there are basic construction differences between the omission and perpetration.The omission offender can be taken as principal only when the criminal constitution of omission offender and perpetration offender has equal value. The equal value of omission and principal offender can not be determined by the traditional theory of causation or the formal theory of guarantor. But it can be determined by the substantive theory of guarantor which has two criteria that one is the dominance of criminal fact, and the other, as a supplementary standard, is guarantor’s functional duty.

Key words: Nonstandard Omission, Equal in Value, Dominance of Criminal Fact, Guarantor’s Functional Duty