摘要： 尽管刑法第23条第1款和第29条第1款给共犯从属性说留出了论证空间，但刑法第29条第2款构成了该说的法律障碍，该款事实上反映的是教唆的独立性。在解释该款时，应将法律规定上教唆的未遂和学理上未遂的教唆区分开，并将该款解释为立法上规定的、教唆犯独立成立的例外条款。虽然独立性例外说和两重性说一样，都会促成将第29条第2款解释为未遂，以及都无法解决因立法之故而导致的处刑失调，但在法律适用上和从属性原则立场上，独立性例外说并不同于两重性说。

关键词: 刑法第29条第2款, 教唆的未遂, 独立性例外说, 两重性说

Abstract: As to the relation between the perpetrator and the accomplice, we should maintain the theory of accessory from the perspective of the principle of legality. In China,  the theory of accessory could only he deduced from the present Article 23. 1 and Article 29. 1. However,  Article 29. 2 of Criminal Law factually reflects the  independence of instigation. In interpreting this article，the versuchte Anstiftung and Anstiftung zum Versuch should be distinguished strictly. We also ought to interpret Article 29. 2 as an exception for independence of instigation. This kind of exception for independence is not a new kind of theory of duality from the perspective of law application and the standpoint of accessory, although there are similarities between the theory of duality and that of exception for independence. That is to say, both of the two theories interpret Article 29. 2 as an attempt, and could not resolve the imbalance of punishment in legislation.

Key words: Article 29.2 of Criminal Law, Versuchte Anstiftung, the Theory of Exception for Inde Pendence, the Theory of Duality