本文選題：民事責(zé)任　切入點：刑事責(zé)任　出處：《長春工業(yè)大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：隨著內(nèi)容涵蓋政治、經(jīng)濟、司法、土地制度以及社會管理等熱點問題的改革開放的不斷深入,市場經(jīng)濟得到更進一步的發(fā)展,經(jīng)濟糾紛對法律辨別的要求不斷提高,民事經(jīng)濟糾紛往往會因為數(shù)額重大而上升到經(jīng)濟犯罪的程度,并且在案件的構(gòu)成要件上極為相似,這就導(dǎo)致了民事責(zé)任與刑事責(zé)任之間的界限越來越模糊。當(dāng)前我國正處于社會轉(zhuǎn)型期,隨著個人財富的積累,人們的維權(quán)意識日益覺醒,保護個人私有財產(chǎn)的同時,很多民事經(jīng)濟糾紛同樣涉及經(jīng)濟犯罪行為,民刑交織案件增多,辨別工作也變得越發(fā)困難。 民刑交叉案件是困擾司法實踐的一個重要問題,已引起了法學(xué)理論界與司法實務(wù)界的廣泛關(guān)注。引起民事責(zé)任和刑事責(zé)任交叉的違法行為既觸犯了刑事法律規(guī)范,也觸犯了民事法律規(guī)范,提出了民刑交叉案件的具體歸屬的難題。真正意義上對這一難題的具體研究卻相對匱乏。為適應(yīng)審判實踐的需要,有必要對民事責(zé)任與刑事責(zé)任進行比較分析,從概念、共通性、差異性等方面對實體問題進行深入的理論探討,以使我國民刑交叉案件處理機制得以完善。 通過幾個司法實踐中的具體典型案例,指出民刑交叉案件的普遍存在以及對民事責(zé)任與刑事責(zé)任交叉區(qū)分的困難,并在借鑒國內(nèi)外研究經(jīng)驗的基礎(chǔ)上,對民事責(zé)任和刑事責(zé)任的相關(guān)概念及相關(guān)范疇界限進行系統(tǒng)研究。在共通性方面主要研究強制性手段、責(zé)任構(gòu)成和歸責(zé)原則等方面的共通特點,也從另一方面揭示了產(chǎn)生民刑交叉案件的原因；在差異性方面主要從性質(zhì)、懲罰功能、補償功能、預(yù)防功能等方面的差異進行研究,從中尋找將民事責(zé)任與刑事責(zé)任細化區(qū)分的辦法,避免交叉現(xiàn)象。通過以上研究,對民刑交叉案件審理模式進行了探討,并提出了解決民刑交叉案件的思路,期望為進一步細化民事責(zé)任與刑事責(zé)任的邊界及制定民刑交叉案件處理機制有所幫助。
[Abstract]:With the deepening of reform and opening to the outside world, which covers hot issues such as politics, economy, justice, land system and social management, the market economy has been further developed, and the requirements for legal discrimination in economic disputes have been constantly raised. Civil economic disputes tend to rise to the level of economic crimes because of the magnitude of the amount, and are very similar in terms of the constituent elements of the cases. This has led to the blurring of the boundary between civil liability and criminal liability. At present, China is in a period of social transformation. With the accumulation of personal wealth, people's awareness of safeguarding their rights is becoming increasingly awakened, while protecting their private property. Many civil and economic disputes also involve economic crimes, civil and criminal cases intertwined, and discrimination becomes more difficult. The civil and criminal cross case is an important problem that puzzles the judicial practice, which has aroused the widespread concern of the legal theory and the judicial practice, and the illegal act that causes the civil liability and the criminal responsibility to cross has violated the criminal law norm. Has also violated the civil law norm, proposed the concrete attribution difficult problem of the civil and criminal cross cases. In the real sense, the concrete research on this difficult problem is relatively scarce. In order to meet the needs of the trial practice, It is necessary to make a comparative analysis of civil liability and criminal liability, and to make a thorough theoretical discussion on substantive issues from the aspects of concept, commonality and difference, so as to perfect the mechanism of handling cross cases of national punishment. Through several typical cases in judicial practice, this paper points out the universal existence of civil and criminal cross cases and the difficulty of distinguishing civil liability from criminal responsibility, and draws lessons from the domestic and foreign research experience. The related concepts of civil liability and criminal liability and the limits of related categories are systematically studied. In the aspect of commonality, it mainly studies the common characteristics of compulsory means, liability constitution and liability principle, etc. On the other hand, it also reveals the causes of the civil and criminal cross cases, and mainly studies the differences in nature, punishment function, compensation function, prevention function and so on. Through the above research, this paper probes into the trial mode of civil and criminal cross-cases, and puts forward some ideas to solve the cross-civil and criminal cases. It is expected to further refine the boundary between civil liability and criminal liability and to establish a civil and criminal cross case handling mechanism.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：長春工業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.1;D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李哲;;刑民交叉案件中的既判力問題探析[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2008年04期

2 江偉,范躍如;刑民交叉案件處理機制研究[J];法商研究;2005年04期

3 李居全;刑事責(zé)任比較研究[J];法學(xué)評論;2000年02期

4 郭天武;陳迪;;先刑后民原則在電信詐騙案件中的困境與破解——以被害人權(quán)益保護為視角[J];法治論壇;2010年04期

5 朱軍;汪強;相明;;刑民交叉案件處理機制的重新構(gòu)建[J];法制與社會;2009年25期

6 林越堅;;非法集資與民間借貸的刑民界分[J];財經(jīng)科學(xué);2013年01期

7 趙合理;;刑民互涉案件中經(jīng)濟犯罪的處理結(jié)果對民商事法律關(guān)系的影響[J];人民司法;2005年09期

8 萬毅;;“先刑后民”原則的實踐困境及其理論破解[J];上海交通大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2007年02期

9 姜昕,王景斌;公法法治:從尊重私權(quán)開始[J];行政與法(吉林省行政學(xué)院學(xué)報);2005年05期

10 吳加明;;合同詐騙罪與表見代理之共存及其釋論——一起盜賣房屋案引發(fā)的刑民沖突及釋論[J];政治與法律;2011年11期

，

本文編號：1564984