抽象危險犯 Abstraktes Gefährdungsdelikt

抽象危險犯在法律的觀點，係立法者依其生活之經驗大量觀察，認為某一類型行為對於特定法益帶有一般高度危險性。因此，只要行為人做出符合構成要件所描述之事實，依照經驗法則，後續發展將會造成特定人受到侵害。

街頭攝影形似抽象危險犯，係基於對生活經驗的大量觀察，而以攝影行為對社會法益或個人法益製造危險，意即升高其法所不容許的風險，係屬行為人所創造出來的作品。

而近年來不斷升温的疫情，國家以防疫為理由，工具化一個又一個抽象危險的刑法，將口罩下的人民視為一個又一個的抽象危險犯。攝影者的著作權、被攝者的肖像權與國家刑罰間的關係，就像那未解的病毒，不斷地纏繞在三者之間。

2019年以降，台灣籠罩在嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎的陰影之下，通過相關法令，用以對疫情的擴散進行有效管制，卻在不自覺間對基本人權進行限縮，羅列不戴口罩者皆為一個個抽象危險犯，工具化形式法規。

此攝影作品以鏡頭收服疫情之下人民被迫配戴口罩，遵守相關防疫規定，以及攝影者與被攝者之間，在面對疫情時刻，與鏡頭間的緊張關係以及對立關係為主旋律，再對攝影者主觀掠奪被攝者為副旋律，進行一系列對於基本人權，做一思想性的挑發。

The point of view of "Abstraktes Gefährdungsdelikt" in criminal law is that legislators have made extensive observations based on their life experience and believe that a certain type of behavior is generally highly dangerous to specific legal interests. Therefore, as long as the perpetrator makes a fact that meets the description of the constituent elements, according to the rule of thumb, the subsequent development will cause a specific person to be harmed.

To me, photography is like an "Crimes constituted by abstract endangerment of legal interests", which is based on a large number of observations of life experience, and the act of photography creates danger to social or personal legal interests, which means that it increases the risk that is not allowed by the law, which belongs to the perpetrator. created works.