1949年的兩岸分立，促使中國大陸走向前蘇聯的刑事法律制度，而與取法德國、日本刑事法律制度的我國漸行漸遠。不過，晚近大陸學界已開始積極吸納德國、日本刑法理論作為借鑑，並對繼受蘇聯刑法理論的得失做檢討。近來，兩岸交流日益頻繁，此種氛圍固然有助於透過理性對話去異求同，惟雙方若對彼此的刑法理論之基本概念，欠缺一定程度的理解，良性互動將難以開啟與延續。中國大陸自前蘇聯引進的「犯罪構成」理論，與我國承襲德國刑法理論而來的「構成要件」理論，即屬因誤解而被相提併論的適例。基於此，本文乃致力於澄清兩岸犯罪成立要件的內容，盼能增進雙方的認知。

With the separation of Taiwan and China since 1949, the Chinese criminal
code drifted away from Taiwan's. The Chinese system followed the fundamentals of the formerly USSR system while Taiwan's originated from Germany and Japan. The Taiwan Strait remains intact while the rift widens. Of late Chinese scholars started to direct their attention to the criminological tenet of Germany and Japan for comparison and review.Cross-strait exchange has become ever frequent. Such an atmosphere brings about rational dialog which conduces to iron out difference between Taiwan and China.A common ground for basic criminological concepts is, however, lacking,as a result of insufficiency of mutual understanding. A benevolent intercourse is hard to come by, not to say continue.The constitution of crime that China inherited from USSR runs counter to Tatbestand that Taiwan derived from Germany. It serves as a good example for comparison due to misunderstanding. Based on this, the Essay is devoted to clarification of the conditions of Tatbestand on both sides of the Strait in a hope to promote understanding.