Successive complicity refers to the situation where the first perpetrator initiates a partial criminal act,resulting in certain results（states）,then the informed subsequent actor is involved in either jointly executing or assisting the first perpetrator in completing the remaining act.The theory of successive complicity primarily revolves around the structure of successive complicity and the criminal responsibility of subsequent actor,with the latter being the core issue.

From a macro perspective,in the judicial practice of Germany,Japan,and Taiwan Province of China,which have been significantly influenced by German and Japan,the viewpoint of fully affirming successive complicity has declined,instead,the legal precedents of limiting and completely denying successive complicity have become prevalent.In the judicial practice of the mainland of China,while there remains a wide recognition of the perspective fully affirming successive complicity among judicial bodies,intermediate and negative viewpoints are also gaining increasingly powerful.Looking at this issue from a mesoscopic perspective,the（limited or comprehensive）affirmative judgements of successive complicity tends to adopt a holistic approach in the determination of whether an accomplice is established or not,while a more individualized treatment is applied in sentencing.The cases of negating successive complicity to lean towards an individualized approach to the identification and punishment of accomplices.At a micro level,（limited or comprehensive）precedents that affirm successive complicity are often based on the principles of“indivisibility of one crime”,“recognize it even after knowing the prior crime”,“actively utilize the prior crime”,and“the effect of the prior criminal act is ongoing”.On the other hand,judgments that deny successive complicity generally hinge on factors like“no joint intention”,“absence of causality”.

The final time point at which the subsequent actor intervenes should not be formally contingent on the completed crime,nor should it be solely based on the substantive end of the criminal act.As long as the crime of the former actor can be evaluated as being implemented,the subsequent actor can collude in participation and establish an accomplice relationship.It is not necessary for the actors to share and complete the residual criminal behavior,which is the inevitable result of the substantiation of the principal offender.Successive complicity operates on the premise of“one crime”,and the two consecutive behaviors in successive complicity can only occur within“the same opportunity”.Therefore,the issue of successive complicity commonly arises in cases of a single crime and inclusive offence,but discussing successive complicity in implicated offences holds neither necessity nor value.

The criminal liability of the latter actor should be divided into two aspects:the nature of the act and the scope of responsibility.These should be further discussed independently based on the legal principles of joint principal offenders and accessory offenders.

The joint principal offender is a type of crime that jointly causes illegal infringement.The principle of“part action with full responsibilities”is rooted in the“attribution of mutual behavior”based on subjective“intention communication”（collusion）and objective“mutual utilization and supplementation”.Therefore,the theory of partly criminal common can accurately reveal the essence of the joint principal offender,aligning with the provisions of Chinese criminal law.In the context of the substantive principal offender,as posited by the theory of partly criminal common,it is necessary that the existence of intention communication and joint execution among the involved parties for the establishment of the joint principal offender.However,it does not require a realistic sharing of the execution behavior.As for the successive joint principal offender,the communication of intentions between the prior and latter actor during the commission of the crime,as well as the“ongoing effect of the prior act”,have the function of“bonding”the two consecutive behaviors and incorporating the fact before the latter actor participated in into the“range of conspiracy”,thereby forming a“commonality”.Hence,in principle,the subsequent actor can inherit the evaluation of the constituent elements of the preceding actor's crime.The accessory offender is a type of crime that indirectly causes illegal infringement through the principal offender.As long as the latter actor promotes the former principal offender to commit the crime and indirectly causes the result of legal interest infringement,it can be recognized as accessory offender.Consequently,the establishment of successive accessory offender does not require“the effect of the prior act is ongoing”,nor does it require intention communication between the accessory offender with the prior principal offender.In essence,the subsequent accomplice can also inherit the assessment of the constituent elements of the principal offender's crime.

In terms of the scope of responsibility,successive joint perpetrators and successive accessory offenders are solely bear responsibility for their individual involvement in the constituent elements of“jointly causation”or“facilitating realization”.Given the relative independence of the aggravating result of aggregated consequential offence and the preceding offence in a combined crime,the latter actor is not held accountable for it.Nevertheless,sentencing rules do not exceed the same constituent ele ments.Thus,as long as the sentencing rules are implemented within the“same opportunity”,they should be applied to evaluate the two consecutive behaviors.

The attribution of criminal liability for successive complicity must be based on the provisions of Chinese criminal law,especially those pertaining to the criminal participation system and the illegalstructure of a specific offence.While there are many ways to explain traditional classification of accomplices based on work-division and function categorization,it is imperative to lean towards an interpretation that favors a differentiated system,given the limitations of the unitary system.In both judicial practice and theoretical discourse,perpetrators are typically categorized into principal perpetrators and secondary perpetrators.The former is classified as the principal and the latter belongs to the accessory together with help offender.This dual classification must be taken into consideration when comprehending the criminal participation system within Chinese criminal law.Therefore,while affirming the rationality of the concept of a substantive principal offender,we should take the legislative provisions,judicial practice,and general legal theory of our country as the background to moderate the degree of substantiation of principal offender,and reshape the differentiation system with the notion of a semi-substantial principal offender.To elaborate,if an actor plays a pivotal role in the accomplishment of the important part of the offence,a primary perpetrator shall be decided;if an actor plays a secondary role in the accomplishment of the important part of the crime,a secondary perpetrator shall be identified;if an actor aids or promotes the act of perpetrating and its results,an accessory offender shall be recognized.Both the secondary perpetrator and the assisted offender are deemed accessories,and their punishment should be judged individually according to their functions.In specific criminal cases,it is necessary to take legal interests as a guide,use systematic inter pretation to comprehend the illegal structure of the crime,and combine the facts of the cases to ascertain the role played by the actor.If the latter actor exercises control over the“secondary illegal structure”part of a specific crime,he should be recognized as a secondary successive principal offender.The latter actor who controls the“important illegal structure”part of the crime should be recognized as the main successive principal offender.The latter actor who promotes the commission of the crime by the former principal offender should be recognized as a successive accessory offender.Adhering to the above principles,this monograph conducts a detailed examination of the criminal culpability of successive accomplices in offences encompassing intentional injury,illegal detention,kidnapping,robbery,theft,and fraud.

Key words: Successive joint perpetrator; Successive accessory offender; Complicity system; Behavior nature; Scope of criminal responsibility