我國刑法就業務過失設有加重處罰規定，但是在學理上對於其基礎之見解卻相當分歧，以致對於業務過失規定之存廢難有共識，本文所擬探討之核心，即是重新思考業務加重的法理基礎為何，就此課題，國內文獻過去多參考日本學說之討論，雖已有相當之成果，但是，法理之爭並未因此獲得解消。本文試圖對於業務過失加重在德國法制上的發展作一耙梳與探討，因為，不論是我國還是日本，業務過失之立法皆源自於德國，而對此部分之研究正是我國文獻所欠缺者。本文考察德國從普魯士普通法以降，迄至1940年廢除之前，德國刑法對於業務過失加重規定的法理思考，是從業務執行者濫用其執業上的權限出發，加重處罰之理由在於，行為人除對於侵害疏於注意而有過失之外，此一疏失更是職務上義務之違反。本文以此為出發點，重新檢討業務過失規定之解釋與適用。

Under the criminal law of Taiwan penalties of vocational negligence have been accumulative. Yet the academic debate on this issue has showed such stark differences that a consensus on whether vocational negligence should be abolished has not been reached. Scholars in Taiwan who have drawn upon the Japanese literature on this issue have cumulated some remarkable performances; however, they fail to offer an explanation grounded on the reasoning under the Germen Criminal Law. In this regard, this paper attempts to rethink the legal reasoning of the vocational negligence by drawing upon the reasoning of the Germen Criminal Law. Under the Germen Criminal Law, the crime of vocational negligence enacted can be traced back to the Prussian common law (Allgemeines Landrecht für die Preußischen Staaten) and it had not been abolished until 1940. By reviewing theories and practices of vocational negligence under the German Criminal Law, this paper attempts to claim that vocational negligence should be reconsidere d whether a offender abuse his/her autonomy while he/she is on a duty. When an offender does a harm given a vocational negligence, this behavior should be seen as a violation of vocational obligations. Thus, this paper contends that based upon the review of the Germen Criminal Law the implication of vocational negligence should be examined closely.