本文選題：竊取欠條 + 量刑反制定罪��； 參考：《江西財經(jīng)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：欠條經(jīng)常使用于我們經(jīng)濟生活中,但刑法沒有明確規(guī)定侵害欠條行為性質(zhì),對債務(wù)人采取竊取、搶奪、搶劫欠條方式消滅債務(wù)的行為,存在學(xué)術(shù)爭議和實踐困惑。理論界對竊取欠條行為定性存在罪與非罪的分歧,其中“有罪說”又分為盜竊罪、侵占罪、故意毀壞財物罪等不同看法。司法實踐中主流立場對竊取欠條行為是以盜竊罪論處,但存在以下問題:一是竊取欠條既遂判定標準不一,部分判決以欠條是否被債務(wù)人控制或損毀為標準,部分判決則以債務(wù)人通過竊取欠條行為是否達到消滅債務(wù)之目的為標準,特別是在欠條所載金額巨大情形,司法實踐中會傾向性以后者為標準,認定為盜竊未遂,以達到避免債務(wù)人承擔較重法定刑之目的;二是欠條是否是債權(quán)債務(wù)關(guān)系的唯一證明決定了是否成立犯罪,導(dǎo)致一樣的危害行為得到不同等對待;三是以盜竊罪論處量刑不一致問題,不同案例中的竊取欠條行為人在主觀方面情況大致相同,但存在竊取欠條所載金額大的比金額小的量刑要輕;四是判決公信力等問題,辯護人從“侵占罪、盜竊未遂、非法債務(wù)不受法律保護”等方面提出罪與非罪、此罪與彼罪的辯護意見,上訴率也較高。欠條本身一張白紙價值輕微,達不到我國財產(chǎn)犯罪對于數(shù)額較大的要求,但欠條是債權(quán)人主張債權(quán)的重要憑證,屬于一種財產(chǎn)性利益,竊取欠條是非典型財產(chǎn)犯罪行為。在一些復(fù)雜案件處理時,應(yīng)遵守罪刑相適應(yīng)原則,以量刑反制定罪為視角,在刑法解釋方法允許的多種多種情況中擇取一個妥當?shù)姆l予以適用,從而實現(xiàn)罪刑均衡。量刑反制定罪適用范圍:應(yīng)限于同類犯罪,所涉罪名刑法條文之間存在牽連關(guān)系,條文表述存在規(guī)范的構(gòu)成要件要素。竊取欠條行為在上述適用范圍之內(nèi),對債權(quán)實現(xiàn)構(gòu)成危險,債權(quán)人的債權(quán)請求權(quán)得不到法院支持。從國外處理經(jīng)驗來看,也具備應(yīng)受刑罰處罰性。竊取欠條行為實質(zhì)是債務(wù)人先通過借貸合法占有,后竊取欠條拒不返還,符合侵占罪行為特征;竊取欠條相較于竊取同等金額財物,危害后果較輕,以侵占罪論處有助于實現(xiàn)罪刑均衡,可以解決以盜竊罪論處帶來的既遂標準不一問題,侵占罪為自訴罪名,屬親告罪,符合中國債權(quán)債務(wù)人存在關(guān)系淵源的國情,有助于債權(quán)人實現(xiàn)債權(quán)。以侵占罪論處可以避免欠條是否唯一的偶然因素決定罪與非罪,從而有助于保護被告人不受逼供。綜上,以量刑反制定罪為視角,對竊取欠條行為定性為侵占罪較為妥當,實現(xiàn)了法律效果和社會效果的統(tǒng)一。
[Abstract]:IOUs are often used in our economic life, but the criminal law does not clearly stipulate the nature of infringing IOUs, and the behavior of stealing, robbing and robbing the debtor of IOUs to eliminate debts, there are academic disputes and practical puzzles.The difference between the crime and non-crime in the behavior of stealing IOUs is divided into the crime of larceny, the crime of embezzlement, the crime of intentionally destroying property and so on.In judicial practice, the mainstream position is that the theft of IOUs is regarded as the crime of theft, but there are the following problems: first, there are different criteria for judging the accomplishment of the theft of IOUs, and some judgments are based on whether the IOUs are controlled or damaged by the debtor.Some judgments are based on whether the debtor achieves the purpose of eliminating the debt by stealing the IOUs, especially when the amount of money contained in the IOUs is huge, and the latter will be regarded as attempted theft in judicial practice.In order to avoid the debtor to bear a heavier legal penalty, second, whether the IOU is the only proof of the relationship between creditor's rights and debts determines the establishment of the crime, resulting in the same harm behavior is not treated equally;Third, the inconsistency of punishment for theft. In different cases, the subjective situation of the person who stole the IOU is roughly the same, but the penalty of stealing the IOU with a large amount is lighter than that of the smaller one. Fourth, the judgment credibility, and so on.From the aspects of "embezzlement, attempted theft, illegal debt not protected by law" and other aspects of the defense of this crime and his crime, the appeal rate is also higher.The value of a blank piece of paper is slight, which can not meet the requirement of large amount of property crime in our country. However, IOU is an important document for creditors to claim creditor's rights, and belongs to a kind of property interest. Stealing IOU is an atypical property crime.When dealing with some complicated cases, we should abide by the principle of adaptation of crime and punishment, take sentencing counter-system conviction as the angle of view, choose an appropriate article of law to be applied in a variety of situations permitted by the method of criminal law interpretation, so as to achieve a balance between crime and punishment.The scope of application of sentencing counterconviction: it should be limited to the same kind of crime, involving the criminal law provisions of the related offences, and the provisions express the elements of the constituent elements of the norms.The theft of IOUs within the scope of application above poses a danger to the realization of creditor's rights, and the creditor's claim right is not supported by the court.From the experience of foreign processing, it also has the nature of punishment.In essence, the act of stealing IOUs is that the debtor takes possession legally through borrowing first, and then steals the IOUs and refuses to return them, which conforms to the characteristics of the crime of embezzlement; stealing IOUs is less harmful than stealing the same amount of money and property.The punishment of embezzlement is helpful to realize the balance of crime and punishment, and can solve the problem of different standards of accomplishment brought about by the crime of larceny. The crime of embezzlement is the charge of private prosecution, which belongs to the crime of personal prosecution and conforms to the national conditions of the existence of the relationship between the debtor and the creditor in China.Help creditors realize their claims.The conviction of embezzlement can avoid whether the IOU is the only accidental factor that determines the crime and non-crime, which helps to protect the defendant from being forced to confess.To sum up, it is more appropriate to classify the theft of IOUs as the crime of embezzlement from the angle of sentencing counterconviction, and realize the unification of legal effect and social effect.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江西財經(jīng)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 徐光華;;“以刑制罪”視閾下財產(chǎn)罪保護法益的再認識[J];中國法學(xué);2016年06期

2 王瑩;;論財產(chǎn)性利益可否成為盜竊罪行為對象——“介入行為標準”說之提倡[J];政法論壇;2016年04期

3 姚萬勤;陳鶴;;盜竊財產(chǎn)性利益之否定——兼與黎宏教授商榷[J];法學(xué);2015年01期

4 徐楠芝;;論犯罪構(gòu)成要件下財產(chǎn)性利益可成為財產(chǎn)性犯罪對象——以盜竊欠條為例[J];法制與社會;2014年21期

5 黎宏;;論盜竊財產(chǎn)性利益[J];清華法學(xué);2013年06期

6 王駿;;搶劫、盜竊利益行為探究[J];中國刑事法雜志;2009年12期

7 高艷東;;量刑與定罪互動論:為了量刑公正可變換罪名[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2009年05期

8 梁根林;;許霆案的規(guī)范與法理分析[J];中外法學(xué);2009年01期

9 高艷東;;從盜竊到侵占：許霆案的法理與規(guī)范分析[J];中外法學(xué);2008年03期

10 肖中華;閔凱;;侵占罪中“代為保管的他人財物”之含義[J];法學(xué)家;2006年05期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 李嫻;財產(chǎn)性利益的刑法保護研究[D];天津師范大學(xué);2016年

，

本文編號：1769439