在受害人自身和行政机关共同致损的侵权案件中,现有实践中部分法院将“混合过错”理解为过错归责的混合,并据此裁断行政机关承担全部赔偿责任,与有的法院主张根据致害程度承担部分损失之观点形成分歧。按照侵权原理和体系性解释,混合过错中的“过错”应被认定为责任分配的基础性考量因素。在三方过错的侵权案件中,关于行政机关赔偿数额的确定问题,实践和零散的规范均表现出了按份责任与补充责任两种解决思路。明晰混合过错中行政责任的承担规则需要在立法政策上进行选择,需要利用利益衡量策略,将来采取以周全地保障受害人权益为先或以顾及行政赔偿的特殊性为先的立法举措,进而以此为基础厘清混合过错中的民事赔偿与行政赔偿的关系问题。 In the case of infringement jointly caused by the victim itself and the administrative organ, some courts in the existing practice understand “misunderstanding” as a mixture of faulty blame and accordingly adjudicate the administrative organ to assume full liability for compensation, The court argued that differences should be made on the basis of the point of view that the extent of the injury incurred some of the losses. According to the principle of infringement and the systematic explanation, “fault” in the fault of hybrid should be considered as the basic consideration of the distribution of responsibility. In the case of infringement of wrongdoing by the three parties, both the determination of the amount of compensation for the administrative organ, the practice and the fragmented norms have shown two solutions to the responsibility of responsibility and the responsibility of additional responsibility. It is necessary to make clear the choice of legislative responsibility for the fault liability in mixed fault. It is necessary to use the measure of interest to take the legislative measures with comprehensive protection of the rights and interests of the victims as the first priority or take into account the particularity of the administrative compensation. This is the basis to clarify the relationship between civil compensation and administrative compensation in the fault of mixing.