盜竊罪客觀方面行為方式新解讀
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-09-12 21:23
【摘要】：盜竊罪是一種古老的侵財(cái)型犯罪，因其具有較重的社會(huì)危害性，長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)一直倍受?chē)?guó)內(nèi)外刑法學(xué)界的密切關(guān)注。與此同時(shí)，盜竊罪的行為方式往往極其復(fù)雜并具有變化性,隨著我國(guó)社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的迅猛發(fā)展和國(guó)民社會(huì)生活日益呈現(xiàn)的復(fù)雜多樣性,盜竊罪在立法和實(shí)踐等諸多方面也因落后于社會(huì)而日益顯露出一些缺陷和不足。正因?yàn)槿绱�，我�?guó)理論界才產(chǎn)生了眾多圍繞盜竊罪的主體范圍、刑事責(zé)任年齡、犯罪對(duì)象范圍、行為方式認(rèn)定、法定刑設(shè)置等方面問(wèn)題的爭(zhēng)議。作為一種對(duì)日常生活有著廣泛影響的犯罪,盜竊罪理應(yīng)得到相關(guān)立法完善以適應(yīng)新的社會(huì)形勢(shì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展?fàn)顩r。 本文僅試圖對(duì)盜竊罪客觀方面的行為方式進(jìn)行分析,筆者認(rèn)為除了秘密竊取行為方式以外,公然盜竊也應(yīng)該認(rèn)定為盜竊罪客觀行為方式之一。由于目前在我國(guó)處于通說(shuō)地位的是主張盜竊罪客觀方面必須是財(cái)物所有人以不易覺(jué)察的秘密手段獲得財(cái)物為必要前提，秘密乃是盜竊罪的應(yīng)有之意，且這種觀點(diǎn)也是我國(guó)刑法分則中關(guān)于盜竊罪犯罪構(gòu)成要件的立法之意，這就為竭力提倡公然竊取行為也應(yīng)認(rèn)定為盜竊罪的主張?jiān)龃罅穗y度和建立了重重障礙。本文通過(guò)與外國(guó)刑事立法中有關(guān)盜竊罪客觀方面秘密性與公然性的爭(zhēng)議性規(guī)定進(jìn)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(jìn)而建設(shè)性的提出了將公然盜竊引入盜竊罪的設(shè)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(xiàn)狀、研究意義、研究方法以及本文可能的創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)等。 本文的第二部分對(duì)我國(guó)目前處于通說(shuō)地位的觀點(diǎn)即盜竊罪的客觀行為方式僅限于秘密竊取這一觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行解讀，主要從盜竊罪行為方式的本質(zhì)即排除他人對(duì)財(cái)物的支配、建立新的財(cái)物控制關(guān)系、受害人未作出處分財(cái)產(chǎn)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(duì)象的相對(duì)性、行為時(shí)間的限定性等方面進(jìn)行分析，為下一部分得出通說(shuō)觀點(diǎn)的缺陷和理論爭(zhēng)議打下基礎(chǔ)。 文章第三部分詳細(xì)闡述了傳統(tǒng)通說(shuō)將盜竊罪的客觀構(gòu)成要件行為方式僅限于秘密竊取這一觀點(diǎn)在理論和實(shí)踐上的缺陷和不足，理論上的缺陷主要表現(xiàn)傳統(tǒng)通說(shuō)的認(rèn)定使得盜竊罪主客觀要件的相互矛盾，實(shí)踐方面的缺陷多體現(xiàn)在通說(shuō)觀點(diǎn)將導(dǎo)致侵財(cái)型案件在司法實(shí)踐中的定罪模糊等。 文章的最后一部分首先在目前國(guó)內(nèi)外對(duì)盜竊罪客觀方面構(gòu)成要件行為方式的定性爭(zhēng)議的觀點(diǎn)主張進(jìn)行了分類(lèi)匯總，我國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)以“秘密竊取”說(shuō)為通說(shuō)觀點(diǎn)，而國(guó)外理論界則以將“公然竊取”說(shuō)的引入為通說(shuō)觀點(diǎn)，并在其后明確了本文筆者所支持的觀點(diǎn)。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(shí)踐上的合理之處，，這一舉措更加貼合了國(guó)外有關(guān)盜竊罪行為方式的通說(shuō)規(guī)定，并有利于財(cái)產(chǎn)型犯罪定罪標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的明確化，更大大彌補(bǔ)了通說(shuō)中主客觀要件矛盾性這一不足。文章的最后對(duì)以平和手段公然竊取行為的外在表現(xiàn)形式進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)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(xué)位授予單位】：河北經(jīng)貿(mào)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D924.35
本文編號(hào)：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(xué)位授予單位】：河北經(jīng)貿(mào)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D924.35
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 陳家林;;論刑法中的扒竊——對(duì)《刑法修正案(八)》的分析與解讀[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2011年04期
2 張明楷;;盜竊與搶奪的界限[J];法學(xué)家;2006年02期
3 劉柱彬;中國(guó)古代盜竊罪概念的演進(jìn)及形態(tài)[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1993年06期
4 張明楷;論盜竊故意的認(rèn)識(shí)內(nèi)容[J];法學(xué);2004年11期
5 程紅;;論刑法解釋方法的位階[J];法學(xué);2011年01期
6 張洪波;季欣蔚;;公共場(chǎng)所中安保義務(wù)的分配[J];江蘇警官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年06期
7 董玉庭;盜竊罪客觀方面再探[J];吉林大學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2001年03期
8 賈立巖;;淺談對(duì)公交車(chē)上扒竊犯罪及法律適用的幾點(diǎn)認(rèn)識(shí)[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(xué)報(bào);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(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前5條
1 萬(wàn)應(yīng)君;盜竊罪基本問(wèn)題研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2004年
2 張?chǎng)卫?論平和手段公然取財(cái)行為的定性[D];湘潭大學(xué);2008年
3 徐亞萍;論盜竊罪的秘密竊取[D];上海社會(huì)科學(xué)院;2009年
4 楊明;盜竊罪司法疑難問(wèn)題研究[D];貴州師范大學(xué);2009年
5 賈麗娜;盜竊行為樣態(tài)研究[D];遼寧大學(xué);2012年
本文編號(hào)：2240251
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2240251.html
教材專(zhuān)著
