經《刑法修正案(九)》修正,采"分則個罪立法模式"的我國刑法中的競合條款已基本呈現類型化和規模化,即基本形成"從一重處斷"條款、"從特別規定"條款和"數罪并罰"條款三足鼎立的局面,這基本扭轉了我國競合(罪數)體系建構"無法可依"的尷尬局面。三元分立表明立法區別對待想象競合、法條競合與實質競合的基本立場。"從一重處斷"條款,主要應作為想象競合犯處置原則之規定,但也可能是交差關系法條競合和牽連犯等多行為處斷一罪之處置原則的表征。對三分的競合條款的解讀也表明,應當以實質的一罪、處斷的一罪和實質的數罪為基本框架建構我國競合(罪數)體系。

The 9 th amendments of criminal law classified and systemized the concurrently applicable terms into three types: the terms of "Convicted and punished in accordance with the heavier provision",the terms of "Convicted and punished in accordance with the special clause"and the terms of"joinder of punishments for plural crimes". Those three types clearly showed that the legislation intended to differentiate "imaginative joiner of offenses","overlap of articles of law"and "plural offenses".The clauses of "Convicted and punished in accordance with the heavier provision"can not only be regarded as the principle for punishment on "imaginative joiner of offenses",but also be treated as the principle for punishment on the concurrence type of "multi-actors punished as a crime"and "cross relationship",etc. which is one type of "overlap of offenses". The interpretation on those three types of concurrently applicable terms also shows that we should divide our criminal concurrence’s system into three parts: "substantial single offense","Punished as single offense"and "substantial plural offenses".