摘要： 对于行政犯而言，存在着行政不法与刑事不法类型的重叠或交叉，两者之间的界限模糊不清，导致现实中行政执法与刑事司法的衔接不畅。以往的研究或过于抽象笼统，或纠缠于各自要素上的细枝末节，无法真正厘清行政不法与刑事不法的界限。在法益保护主义的前提下，质的差异论和量的差异论并非完全对立。前置性的行政不法对行政犯的成立而言虽然不可或缺，但行政法与刑法在规制范围、规制目的上的差异，决定了司法需要根据法益侵害的性质分别运用质的差异和量的差异妥当地划定行政不法与刑事不法的范围。在行政不法与刑事不法的法益侵害性质相异或者行政不法侵害法益过于抽象的场合，应直接依据质的差异论发挥法益对罪与非罪的界分功能；而在行政不法与刑事不法的法益侵害性质相同时，则依据刑法的从属性性质以法益侵害的程度即量的差异对两者实现有效的区分和衔接。

关键词: 行政犯, 法定犯, 违法性, 行政不法, 刑事不法

Abstract: For the administrative crime, the criminal and the administrative unlawfulness are overlapping with each other.The distinction is too vague to connect the criminal and administrative law enforcement fluently.The previous studies in this area are either too abstract or too detailed, which are not able to draw a clear boundary between the criminal and the administrative unlawfulness.In light of the protection of legal interest, the theory of qualitive difference and the theory of quantitive difference are not totally incompatible.The administrative unlawfulness is although necessary for the administrative crime.However, the administrative and the criminal law have different purpose and range of regulation, which means that the practice should use both the theory of qualitive and quantitive difference to distinguish the criminal and the administrative unlawfulness according to the infringed legal interest in concrete situations.The theory of qualitive difference will distinguish the crime and the non-crime, when the threatened legal interest by a criminal offence are different from the threatened legal interest by an administrative offence.It is compatible with the theory of quantitive difference to distinguish and connect the administrative and the criminal offence, when both of them threaten the same legal interest.

Key words: Administrative Crime, Mala Prohibita, Wrongfulness, Administrative Unlawfulness, Criminal Unlawfulness