盜竊罪客觀方面行為方式新解讀
發(fā)布時間：2018-09-12 21:23
【摘要】：盜竊罪是一種古老的侵財型犯罪，因其具有較重的社會危害性，長期以來一直倍受國內外刑法學界的密切關注。與此同時，盜竊罪的行為方式往往極其復雜并具有變化性,隨著我國社會經濟的迅猛發(fā)展和國民社會生活日益呈現的復雜多樣性,盜竊罪在立法和實踐等諸多方面也因落后于社會而日益顯露出一些缺陷和不足。正因為如此，我國理論界才產生了眾多圍繞盜竊罪的主體范圍、刑事責任年齡、犯罪對象范圍、行為方式認定、法定刑設置等方面問題的爭議。作為一種對日常生活有著廣泛影響的犯罪,盜竊罪理應得到相關立法完善以適應新的社會形勢和經濟發(fā)展狀況。 本文僅試圖對盜竊罪客觀方面的行為方式進行分析,筆者認為除了秘密竊取行為方式以外,公然盜竊也應該認定為盜竊罪客觀行為方式之一。由于目前在我國處于通說地位的是主張盜竊罪客觀方面必須是財物所有人以不易覺察的秘密手段獲得財物為必要前提，秘密乃是盜竊罪的應有之意，且這種觀點也是我國刑法分則中關于盜竊罪犯罪構成要件的立法之意，這就為竭力提倡公然竊取行為也應認定為盜竊罪的主張增大了難度和建立了重重障礙。本文通過與外國刑事立法中有關盜竊罪客觀方面秘密性與公然性的爭議性規(guī)定進行比較與研究，尖銳的指出將盜竊罪客觀方面僅限于秘密竊取的局限性，進而建設性的提出了將公然盜竊引入盜竊罪的設想。 本文共由四部分組成，文章的第一部分為引言，概括論述了文章所研究議題的研究現狀、研究意義、研究方法以及本文可能的創(chuàng)新點等。 本文的第二部分對我國目前處于通說地位的觀點即盜竊罪的客觀行為方式僅限于秘密竊取這一觀點進行解讀，主要從盜竊罪行為方式的本質即排除他人對財物的支配、建立新的財物控制關系、受害人未作出處分財產的行為、不具備“暴力、脅迫性”；盜竊罪“秘密”和“竊取”行為的定性以及秘密竊取行為的特征即行為主體的主觀性、行為對象的相對性、行為時間的限定性等方面進行分析，為下一部分得出通說觀點的缺陷和理論爭議打下基礎。 文章第三部分詳細闡述了傳統(tǒng)通說將盜竊罪的客觀構成要件行為方式僅限于秘密竊取這一觀點在理論和實踐上的缺陷和不足，理論上的缺陷主要表現傳統(tǒng)通說的認定使得盜竊罪主客觀要件的相互矛盾，實踐方面的缺陷多體現在通說觀點將導致侵財型案件在司法實踐中的定罪模糊等。 文章的最后一部分首先在目前國內外對盜竊罪客觀方面構成要件行為方式的定性爭議的觀點主張進行了分類匯總，我國國內以“秘密竊取”說為通說觀點，而國外理論界則以將“公然竊取”說的引入為通說觀點，并在其后明確了本文筆者所支持的觀點。此部分的第二小節(jié)大膽提出將以“平和手段公然竊取”行為引入盜竊罪客觀行為方式的創(chuàng)造性建議，并指出將公然竊取引入盜竊罪具有其理論上和實踐上的合理之處，，這一舉措更加貼合了國外有關盜竊罪行為方式的通說規(guī)定，并有利于財產型犯罪定罪標準的明確化，更大大彌補了通說中主客觀要件矛盾性這一不足。文章的最后對以平和手段公然竊取行為的外在表現形式進行了詳細的解讀。
[Abstract]:Larceny is an ancient crime of infringing on property, which has been paid close attention by the criminal law circles both at home and abroad for a long time because of its great social harmfulness. Meanwhile, the behavior of larceny is often extremely complex and changeable, with the rapid development of social economy and the increasingly complex life of the national society. As a result, there are many disputes about the scope of the subject of larceny, the age of criminal responsibility, the scope of the object of crime, the determination of the mode of conduct, the setting of legal penalty and so on. Crimes that have a broad impact on daily life should be perfected by relevant legislation to adapt to the new social situation and economic development.
This article only attempts to analyze the objective aspects of the crime of larceny, the author believes that in addition to the secret theft, blatant theft should also be recognized as one of the objective behavior of larceny. Secret means to obtain property is a necessary prerequisite, secrecy is the proper meaning of larceny, and this view is also the legislative meaning of the constituent elements of larceny in the specific provisions of the Criminal Law of China, which makes it more difficult and obstacles to advocate that blatant larceny should also be recognized as larceny. By comparing and researching the controversial provisions concerning the objectivity of larceny, the author points out sharply that the objective aspect of larceny is limited to the limitation of secret larceny, and then constructively puts forward the idea of introducing open larceny into larceny.
This paper consists of four parts, the first part of the article is the introduction, which summarizes the research status, significance, research methods and possible innovations of this paper.
The second part of this article interprets the general view that the objective behavior of larceny is confined to secret theft, mainly from the nature of larceny, that is, to exclude other people's domination of property, to establish a new relationship of property control, the victim has not made the act of disposing of property, and does not possess " Violence, coercion, the characterization of theft "secret" and "theft" and the characteristics of secret theft, i.e. the subjectivity of the subject, the relativity of the object and the limitation of the time of the act, are analyzed in order to lay the foundation for the next part to draw a general view of the defects and theoretical controversy.
The third part of the article elaborates the defects and deficiencies in theory and practice of the traditional theory that the objective constituent elements of larceny are confined to secret theft. The viewpoint will lead to the conviction of the invading financial cases in judicial practice.
The last part of the article firstly classifies and summarizes the opinions on the qualitative controversy of the objective aspects of the constitutive elements of larceny both at home and abroad. In China, the theory of "secret theft" is the general view, while in foreign theoretical circles, the theory of "open theft" is introduced as the general view, and after that this article is clear. The second section of this part boldly puts forward the creative suggestion of introducing "blatant theft by peaceful means" into the objective behavior of larceny, and points out that the introduction of blatant theft into larceny is reasonable in theory and practice, which is more suitable for the larceny abroad. The general provisions of the mode are conducive to the clarification of the conviction criteria of property-type crimes and make up for the contradiction of subjective and objective elements in the general theory.
【學位授予單位】：河北經貿大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.35
本文編號：2240251
[Abstract]:Larceny is an ancient crime of infringing on property, which has been paid close attention by the criminal law circles both at home and abroad for a long time because of its great social harmfulness. Meanwhile, the behavior of larceny is often extremely complex and changeable, with the rapid development of social economy and the increasingly complex life of the national society. As a result, there are many disputes about the scope of the subject of larceny, the age of criminal responsibility, the scope of the object of crime, the determination of the mode of conduct, the setting of legal penalty and so on. Crimes that have a broad impact on daily life should be perfected by relevant legislation to adapt to the new social situation and economic development.
This article only attempts to analyze the objective aspects of the crime of larceny, the author believes that in addition to the secret theft, blatant theft should also be recognized as one of the objective behavior of larceny. Secret means to obtain property is a necessary prerequisite, secrecy is the proper meaning of larceny, and this view is also the legislative meaning of the constituent elements of larceny in the specific provisions of the Criminal Law of China, which makes it more difficult and obstacles to advocate that blatant larceny should also be recognized as larceny. By comparing and researching the controversial provisions concerning the objectivity of larceny, the author points out sharply that the objective aspect of larceny is limited to the limitation of secret larceny, and then constructively puts forward the idea of introducing open larceny into larceny.
This paper consists of four parts, the first part of the article is the introduction, which summarizes the research status, significance, research methods and possible innovations of this paper.
The second part of this article interprets the general view that the objective behavior of larceny is confined to secret theft, mainly from the nature of larceny, that is, to exclude other people's domination of property, to establish a new relationship of property control, the victim has not made the act of disposing of property, and does not possess " Violence, coercion, the characterization of theft "secret" and "theft" and the characteristics of secret theft, i.e. the subjectivity of the subject, the relativity of the object and the limitation of the time of the act, are analyzed in order to lay the foundation for the next part to draw a general view of the defects and theoretical controversy.
The third part of the article elaborates the defects and deficiencies in theory and practice of the traditional theory that the objective constituent elements of larceny are confined to secret theft. The viewpoint will lead to the conviction of the invading financial cases in judicial practice.
The last part of the article firstly classifies and summarizes the opinions on the qualitative controversy of the objective aspects of the constitutive elements of larceny both at home and abroad. In China, the theory of "secret theft" is the general view, while in foreign theoretical circles, the theory of "open theft" is introduced as the general view, and after that this article is clear. The second section of this part boldly puts forward the creative suggestion of introducing "blatant theft by peaceful means" into the objective behavior of larceny, and points out that the introduction of blatant theft into larceny is reasonable in theory and practice, which is more suitable for the larceny abroad. The general provisions of the mode are conducive to the clarification of the conviction criteria of property-type crimes and make up for the contradiction of subjective and objective elements in the general theory.
【學位授予單位】：河北經貿大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.35
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前10條
1 陳家林;;論刑法中的扒竊——對《刑法修正案(八)》的分析與解讀[J];法律科學(西北政法大學學報);2011年04期
2 張明楷;;盜竊與搶奪的界限[J];法學家;2006年02期
3 劉柱彬;中國古代盜竊罪概念的演進及形態(tài)[J];法學評論;1993年06期
4 張明楷;論盜竊故意的認識內容[J];法學;2004年11期
5 程紅;;論刑法解釋方法的位階[J];法學;2011年01期
6 張洪波;季欣蔚;;公共場所中安保義務的分配[J];江蘇警官學院學報;2008年06期
7 董玉庭;盜竊罪客觀方面再探[J];吉林大學社會科學學報;2001年03期
8 賈立巖;;淺談對公交車上扒竊犯罪及法律適用的幾點認識[J];今日科苑;2009年24期
9 童偉華;;論日本刑法中的占有[J];太平洋學報;2007年01期
10 李俊英;潘庸魯;;扒竊與普通盜竊的適用界限[J];人民司法;2012年22期
相關碩士學位論文 前5條
1 萬應君;盜竊罪基本問題研究[D];武漢大學;2004年
2 張鑫磊;論平和手段公然取財行為的定性[D];湘潭大學;2008年
3 徐亞萍;論盜竊罪的秘密竊取[D];上海社會科學院;2009年
4 楊明;盜竊罪司法疑難問題研究[D];貴州師范大學;2009年
5 賈麗娜;盜竊行為樣態(tài)研究[D];遼寧大學;2012年
本文編號：2240251
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2240251.html
