本文選題：非法集資　切入點：民間借貸　出處：《廣州大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：民間借貸作為正規(guī)金融融資有益的補充,在世界各國廣泛存在,且具有非常悠久的歷史。近些年來,我國民間借貸資金規(guī)模呈現(xiàn)出急劇增長的態(tài)勢,究其原因在于,與正規(guī)金融融資相比,民間借貸融資的特點或者說優(yōu)勢非常明顯。一是借貸雙方不用簽訂復(fù)雜的借款合同,不用履行繁瑣的擔(dān)保手續(xù),方便快捷,二是借貸雙方一般來說都是相對較為熟悉的人,貸款人審查合同也不會很嚴格,審查時間相對較短,借款人可以很快拿到借款。正是因為民間借貸的上述特點,再加上我國民間借貸法律法規(guī)的不系統(tǒng)、不完善,民間借貸在快速發(fā)展的過程中也產(chǎn)生了諸多問題,其中涉非法集資犯罪的問題尤其引人關(guān)注,一直都是理論和實踐上中關(guān)注的焦點。而對于涉非法集資犯罪的民間借貸合同效力和處理程序問題又是此問題的核心問題,理論界和實務(wù)界對此也是莫衷一是。故該問題非常有探究之必要。本文共包含五個部分:第一部分也就是前言部分,簡要交代了選題的背景,研究的現(xiàn)狀和研究的方法。第二部分主要闡明的是在民間借貸案件中,涉非法集資犯罪的兩種典型類型。我們都知道,非法集資犯罪并不是一個刑法罪名,而是一類犯罪的統(tǒng)稱。在非法集資犯罪中,有兩類犯罪與民間借貸密切相關(guān),即非法吸收公眾存款罪和集資詐騙罪。由于本文主要闡述的是合同效力和處理程序,故第二部分只對這兩類罪名做一簡單的介紹,并將其與合法的民間借貸做簡單的區(qū)分。第三部分和第四部分是本文的重點。第三部分是關(guān)于涉非法集資犯罪的民間借貸合同效力問題。筆者首先歸納了目前對于該問題的三種主要觀點,即無效說、有效說和可撤銷說,然后分析了產(chǎn)生這種分歧的原因,最后闡述了筆者個人觀點。第四部分是關(guān)于涉非法集資犯罪的民間借貸案件處理程序的問題。筆者首先分析了對“先刑后民”“先民后刑”“刑民并行”三種處理模式的優(yōu)缺點做了簡要的分析,并認為應(yīng)當(dāng)根據(jù)案情的不同分別選擇不同的模式。最后對我國涉非法集資犯罪的民間借貸案件的處理程序進行了分析。第五部分為結(jié)語部分。
[Abstract]:As a beneficial supplement of formal financial financing, private lending exists widely all over the world and has a very long history.In recent years, the scale of private lending funds in China has shown a rapid growth, the reason is that compared with the formal financial financing, the characteristics or advantages of private lending financing is very obvious.First, the borrowers and borrowers do not have to sign complicated loan contracts, do not have to go through complicated procedures of guarantee, and are convenient and quick. The other is that the borrowers are generally relatively familiar with the people, and the lenders will not be very strict in examining the contracts.The examination time is relatively short, the borrower can obtain the loan quickly.It is precisely because of the above characteristics of private lending, coupled with the unsystematic and imperfect laws and regulations on private lending in our country, that in the course of the rapid development of private lending, there are also many problems, among which the problem of illegal fund-raising is of particular concern.It has always been the focus of attention in theory and practice.However, the problem of the validity and procedure of the folk loan contract involved in the crime of illegal financing is the core of this problem, which is also divided between the theorists and the practitioners.Therefore, the problem is very necessary to explore.This paper consists of five parts: the first part is the preface, briefly describes the background of the topic, research status and research methods.The second part mainly clarifies two typical types of illegal financing crime in private lending cases.We all know that the crime of illegal financing is not a criminal offence, but a general term for a crime.In the crime of illegal raising funds, there are two kinds of crimes which are closely related to folk loan, that is, the crime of illegally taking deposits from the public and the crime of financing fraud.Because this article mainly elaborates the contract validity and the processing procedure, the second part only makes a simple introduction to these two kinds of charges, and makes a simple distinction between them and the legal folk loan.The third and fourth parts are the focus of this paper.The third part is about the validity of private loan contract.At first, the author summarizes three main views on this problem, namely, invalidity, effective theory and reversible theory, then analyzes the reasons for the difference, and finally expounds the author's personal views.The fourth part deals with the procedure of handling private loan cases involving illegal financing crimes.Firstly, the author analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of the three modes of dealing with "first punishment before people", "foreman after punishment" and "parallel punishment and civilian", and thinks that different modes should be chosen according to the different cases.At last, the author analyzes the procedure of dealing with the private loan cases involving the crime of illegal raising funds in our country.The fifth part is the conclusion.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D924.3

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 袁林;姚萬勤;;民間借貸涉罪案件處理模式的反思與重構(gòu)[J];天津師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2016年01期

2 楊立新;;民間借貸關(guān)系法律調(diào)整新時期的法律適用尺度——《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理民間借貸案件適用法律若干問題的規(guī)定》解讀[J];法律適用;2015年11期

3 楊臨萍;姚輝;韓延斌;王林清;;《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理民間借貸案件適用法律若干問題的規(guī)定》的理解與適用[J];法律適用;2015年11期

4 劉憲權(quán);翟寅生;;刑民交叉案件中刑事案件對民事合同效力的影響研究——以非法集資案件中的合同效力為視角[J];政治與法律;2013年10期

5 熊進光;劉紅;;民間借貸融資中民刑交叉適用的沖突與協(xié)調(diào)[J];行政與法;2013年09期

6 李全鎖;杜博;;刑民交叉案件法律規(guī)制路徑之反思與重構(gòu)——以涉嫌刑事犯罪的民間借貸案件為例[J];法律適用;2013年07期

7 李梅榮;張玉平;;民間借貸案件中涉及“刑民交叉”的處理方式[J];中國審判;2013年06期

8 梅山群;夏理淼;;涉及民間借貸違法犯罪的法律適用問題研究[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報;2013年02期

9 賈邦俊;劉陽;;非法吸收公眾存款罪下借款合同效力探析[J];西部法學(xué)評論;2013年01期

10 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

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 徐彰;民間借貸問題研究[D];東南大學(xué);2016年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 張婷;民間借貸刑民交叉案件的處理研究[D];河北大學(xué);2016年

2 葛佳俊;刑民交錯案件的程序選擇[D];華東政法大學(xué);2015年

3 李顧昱;非法吸收公眾存款罪所涉合同效力問題研究[D];浙江大學(xué);2014年

4 黃海清;刑民交叉案件的審理[D];廈門大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號：1729092