【摘要】：近年來，社會(huì)上出現(xiàn)了較多的非法占有封緘物的現(xiàn)象，例如甲委托乙保管自己的上鎖手提箱，但是乙卻將上鎖手提箱據(jù)為己有，此時(shí)乙應(yīng)構(gòu)成何種罪名，理論界對于此種現(xiàn)象的定性問題仍存在著較大的爭議。爭議的焦點(diǎn)在于對于封緘物中內(nèi)容物的占有認(rèn)定有不同理解，存在以下幾種觀點(diǎn)：1.委托者占有說。該說認(rèn)為委托人不僅占有封緘物的整體，同時(shí)還占有封緘物中的內(nèi)容物。如果受托人非法占有其中的內(nèi)容物則可能構(gòu)成盜竊罪。2.受托者占有說。該說認(rèn)為受托人不僅占有封緘物的整體，同時(shí)也占有封緘物中的內(nèi)容物。如果受托人非法占有封緘物中的內(nèi)容物則可能構(gòu)成侵占罪。3.區(qū)別說。該說并沒有像委托者占有說和受托者占有說那樣一概而論，該說認(rèn)為對于封緘物的整體以及封緘物中的內(nèi)容物要區(qū)分對待。對于封緘物整體而言，應(yīng)由受托者占有，，如果受托者非法占有封緘物的整體則構(gòu)成侵占罪；對于封緘物中的內(nèi)容物而言，應(yīng)由委托者占有，如果受托者非法占有封緘物中的內(nèi)容物則構(gòu)成盜竊罪。4.修正區(qū)別說。修正區(qū)別說與區(qū)別說相似之處在于將封緘物整體和封緘物中的內(nèi)容物區(qū)別對待，不同的是對于封緘物中的內(nèi)容物而言，修正區(qū)別說認(rèn)為應(yīng)由委托者和受托者共同占有。5.體積大小說。體積大小說認(rèn)為對于封緘物中的內(nèi)容物占有認(rèn)定問題，主要因內(nèi)容物的體積大小具體而定。封緘物中內(nèi)容物的占有認(rèn)定的不同理解將會(huì)導(dǎo)致定罪量刑的不同。 本文將主要論述以下幾個(gè)問題，首先，對于封緘物含義的理解。封緘物是指經(jīng)過密封、上鎖的物品。封緘物不僅包括整體，還包括其中的內(nèi)容物。對于密封上鎖等手段需要達(dá)到一定的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，即要阻礙第三人對物品的控制，如果僅僅是起到防止物品掉落的作用則不能稱之為封緘物。其次，刑法中占有的理解。刑法中的占有不僅對物品要有事實(shí)上的支配，還要有支配意思，刑法上的占有構(gòu)成要素包含主觀構(gòu)成要素以及客觀構(gòu)成要素，對物品事實(shí)上的支配是客觀構(gòu)成要素，對物品的支配意思是主觀構(gòu)成要素，主觀構(gòu)成要素和客觀構(gòu)成要素必須同時(shí)滿足。再次，論述封緘物占有的不同學(xué)說，筆者對封緘物占有的相關(guān)學(xué)說提出自己的看法，認(rèn)為委托者將密封的財(cái)物交由受托者保管，受托者對封緘物的整體享有占有，同時(shí)委托者將財(cái)物密封的目的就是要阻礙受托者對其中內(nèi)容物的占有。因此，對于封緘物中的內(nèi)容物而言，應(yīng)由委托者占有。受托者占有封緘物的整體，委托者則占有封緘物中的內(nèi)容物，因此區(qū)別說對于封緘物占有的理解更為合理。
[Abstract]:In recent years, there have been more phenomena of illegal possession of sealed things in society. For example, A entrusts B with keeping his own locked suitcase, but B takes the locked suitcase for his own possession. What kind of crime should B constitute at this time? There is still a great controversy in the theoretical circle about the qualitative problem of this phenomenon. The focus of the dispute is that there are different understandings of possession of contents in sealed objects, and there are several views: 1. The consignor holds the theory. This theory holds that the client not only possesses the whole of the sealed thing, but also possesses the contents of the sealed thing. If the trustee is illegally in possession of the contents, it may constitute theft. 2. The trustee has possession. The theory holds that the trustee not only holds the whole of the sealed thing, but also the contents of the sealed thing. If the trustee takes possession of the contents of the sealed thing illegally, it may constitute the crime of embezzlement. Difference theory. This theory is not as general as the theory of entrustment possession and the trustee possession theory, which thinks that the whole of the sealed thing and the contents of the sealed thing should be treated differently. As to the sealed thing as a whole, it shall be in the possession of the trustee, and if the trustee unlawfully possesses the whole of the sealed thing, it shall constitute a crime of embezzlement; for the contents of the sealed thing, it shall be in the possession of the trustee, If the trustee illegally takes possession of the contents of the sealed object, it constitutes theft. 4. Revise the distinction theory. The similarity between the revised distinction theory and the difference theory lies in the different treatment of the whole and the contents of the sealed object. The difference is that for the content in the sealed object, the revised distinction theory should be jointly owned by the entrustor and the trustee. Volume theory. The theory of volume size believes that the determination of the contents in sealed objects is mainly determined by the volume size of the contents. Different understandings of possession and determination of contents in sealed objects will lead to different conviction and sentencing. This paper will mainly discuss the following issues, first, the meaning of sealed matter understanding. A sealed object is a sealed, locked object. Sealed objects include not only the whole, but also the contents. It is necessary to reach a certain standard for sealing and locking, that is, to prevent the third party from controlling the objects, if it is only to prevent the objects from falling, it can not be called sealed objects. Secondly, the understanding of possession in criminal law. Possession in criminal law should not only have a de facto domination over goods, but also have a dominant meaning. The elements of possession in criminal law include subjective and objective elements, and the domination of objects in fact is an objective constituent element. The dominating meaning of goods is subjective elements, subjective elements and objective elements must be satisfied at the same time. Thirdly, the author discusses the different theories of sealed possession, the author puts forward his own views on the relevant theories of sealed possession, and holds that the trustee will hold the sealed property in the custody of the trustee, and the trustee will have the whole possession of the sealed thing. At the same time, the consignor seals the property in order to prevent the trustee from possessing the contents. Therefore, the contents of the sealed thing should be possessed by the entruster. The trustee holds the whole of the sealed thing, and the consignor occupies the content of the sealed thing, so it is more reasonable to understand the sealed possession.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D924.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

中國期刊全文數(shù)據(jù)庫 前9條

1 劉明祥;論刑法中的占有[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2000年03期

2 張翔飛;商業(yè)侵占罪初探[J];法學(xué);1997年09期

3 周光權(quán);侵占罪疑難問題研究[J];法學(xué)研究;2002年03期

4 董玉庭;盜竊罪與侵占罪界限研究[J];人民檢察;2001年04期

5 黃祥青;;論刑法上財(cái)物控制關(guān)系的認(rèn)定[J];人民司法;2006年12期

6 于世忠;侵占罪與盜竊罪的界定[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2002年03期

7 童偉華;;論日本刑法中的占有[J];太平洋學(xué)報(bào);2007年01期

8 黎宏;;論財(cái)產(chǎn)犯中的占有[J];中國法學(xué);2009年01期

9 魏東;;侵占罪犯罪對象要素之解析檢討[J];中國刑事法雜志;2005年05期

本文編號(hào)：2184959