本文關(guān)鍵詞： 消費(fèi)者維權(quán) 過(guò)度維權(quán) 敲詐勒索　出處：《天津師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：近年來(lái)普法卓有成效,《消法》出臺(tái)后消費(fèi)者維權(quán)意識(shí)更加強(qiáng)烈,但是在消費(fèi)領(lǐng)域卻出現(xiàn)一種現(xiàn)象——消費(fèi)者天價(jià)索賠。2006年大學(xué)生黃靜向華碩公司天價(jià)索賠拉開(kāi)了消費(fèi)者過(guò)度維權(quán)涉敲詐勒索罪的序幕,2016年李海峰因四包方便面向今麥郎索賠300萬(wàn)后被以敲詐勒索罪定罪處罰,再一次引起社會(huì)各界的廣泛關(guān)注,令人不禁深思,什么驅(qū)使權(quán)利人不顧法律的威嚴(yán),以身犯險(xiǎn)。到底此種行為是過(guò)度維權(quán)還是敲詐勒索,理論界和司法實(shí)踐都尚有巨大爭(zhēng)議,究其原因在于該行為涉及民法和刑法雙重領(lǐng)域的模糊地帶。在本文中層層剖析了什么是維權(quán),什么是過(guò)度維權(quán),什么是敲詐勒索,什么情況下過(guò)度維權(quán)會(huì)演變成敲詐勒索罪。通過(guò)國(guó)內(nèi)外的研究進(jìn)行歸納得出各國(guó)在認(rèn)定時(shí)候考慮的因素可以歸結(jié)為以下幾點(diǎn):一是是否存在正當(dāng)?shù)臋?quán)利基礎(chǔ),二是在權(quán)利范圍內(nèi)行使權(quán)利,遵循主客觀相統(tǒng)一的原則全面分析認(rèn)定。通過(guò)研究國(guó)內(nèi)司法認(rèn)定方面的問(wèn)題,歸納出爭(zhēng)議焦點(diǎn)。最后具體分析主觀的過(guò)度與敲詐勒索的界分,手段的過(guò)度與敲詐勒索的界分,權(quán)利主張的過(guò)度與敲詐勒索的界分,以此綜合論證過(guò)度維權(quán)與敲詐勒索的界分。最后提出期望,消費(fèi)者正確行使權(quán)力,引導(dǎo)社會(huì)風(fēng)尚,理清法律模糊地帶,刑法要時(shí)刻保持其謙抑性但又要維護(hù)法律尊嚴(yán)體現(xiàn)公平正義,慎重入刑。
[Abstract]:In recent years, law popularization has been fruitful, and consumers' awareness of safeguarding their rights has become stronger after the "Consumer Law" was introduced. However, in the field of consumption, there is a phenomenon-consumer price claims. On 2006, Huang Jing, a college student, started the prelude to the crime of extortion involving excessive rights protection by consumers against Asustek Corporation. On 2016, Li Haifeng came to this day because of four packets of instant noodles. After claiming 3 million, he was convicted of racketeering. Once again, it has aroused widespread concern from all walks of life in the society, which makes people wonder what drives the right holders to commit danger in disregard of the law. Whether this kind of behavior is excessive in safeguarding rights or extortion, there is great controversy in the theoretical circle and judicial practice. The reason lies in the fuzzy zone of the dual domain of civil law and criminal law. In this paper, we analyze what is rights protection, what is excessive rights protection, what is extortion, what is extortion. Under what circumstances excessive rights protection will evolve into the crime of extortion. Through research at home and abroad, we can conclude that the factors considered by countries in the determination can be summed up as follows: first, whether there is a legitimate right basis, The second is to exercise the right within the scope of the right, follow the principle of unity of subjectivity and objectivity. Through the study of domestic judicial issues, we can conclude the focus of the dispute. Finally, we will specifically analyze the division between subjective excess and extortion. The division between excessive means and extortion, and between claims and extortion, so as to prove comprehensively the boundary between excessive rights protection and extortion. Finally, the author puts forward the expectation that consumers can exercise their power correctly and guide the social fashion. In order to clear the fuzzy zone of law, criminal law should always maintain its modesty but also maintain the dignity of law to embody fairness and justice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：天津師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D924.3;D922.294

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 葉良芳;;權(quán)利行使與敲詐勒索的界限[J];犯罪研究;2007年02期

，

本文編號(hào)：1554845