摘要： 行为人以不作为参与他人的法益侵害行为，是否成立共同犯罪；若能成立共同犯罪，是成立不作为的共同正犯还是不作为的帮助犯，均存在争议。相对而言，重要作用理论和因果过程支配理论具有妥当性。关于行为人以不作为参与他人的作为犯的性质，主要涉及在什么范围内承认犯罪阻止义务，以及在负有犯罪阻止义务者能够履行义务而不履行时，是成立共同正犯、同时正犯还是帮助犯。应当认为，在不作为者与作为者存在共谋的场合，可以成立共同正犯；不存在共谋的，如果否认义务犯理论，应当根据是否存在事实支配关系或者行为人对法益侵害结果的发生的作用力的大小，分别成立不作为的共同正犯和帮助犯。在行为人以不作为参与他人的不作为犯的场合，根据具体情况分别成立不作为的共同正犯或者同时正犯。

关键词: 不作为, 参与, 法益侵害, 不作为的共同正犯, 不作为的帮助犯

Abstract: There are debates on whether someone participating in violations of others' legal interests will constitufe a joint crime or not,  and so on. Most scholars advocate the opinion of joint crime of nonfeasance accomplice, while  some scholars advocate the opinion of abettor of nonfeasance accomplice. Two problems should be solved. Firstly, what is the extent to acknowledging the obligation to prevent the crime? Secondly, when the behavior does not fulfill the obligation to prevent the crime, should he be punished for joint crime of nonfeasance accomplice, or abettor of nonfeasance accomplice? If we deny the obligation theory, according to the crime control theory, the behavior should contitute a joint crime of nonfeasance accomplice or abettor of nonfeasance accomplice.

Key words: Omission, Participate, Violation of Legal Interests, Joint Crime of Nonfeasance Accomplice, Abettor of Nonfeasance Accomplice