本文選題：信用證欺詐　切入點(diǎn)：獨(dú)立抽象原則　出處：《中國(guó)政法大學(xué)》2003年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】： 信用證以銀行信用代替商業(yè)信用大大減少了國(guó)際貿(mào)易貨款結(jié)算中的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，，是國(guó)際貿(mào)易中使用最廣泛的結(jié)算方式，也是最重要的一種資金融通方式，被譽(yù)為國(guó)際貿(mào)易的“生命血液”。 自從中國(guó)銀行1987年7月1日起在所有開出的信用證中加上“本信用證按照國(guó)際商會(huì)第400號(hào)跟單信用證統(tǒng)一慣例的條款開立”的字樣，表明中國(guó)銀行界正式把UCP當(dāng)作國(guó)際慣例加以接受之后，中國(guó)大陸這片凈土也開始遭到信用證欺詐無(wú)情的進(jìn)犯。近年來(lái)信用證欺詐案件涉及的數(shù)額越來(lái)越大，超過1億元人民幣的案件也不在少數(shù)。這一現(xiàn)象日益引起人們的極大關(guān)注，它已經(jīng)給正常的貿(mào)易秩序和銀行結(jié)算秩序造成了嚴(yán)重危害。特別是隨著我國(guó)加入世貿(mào)組織，國(guó)內(nèi)與國(guó)際市場(chǎng)實(shí)現(xiàn)充分接軌，對(duì)信用證欺詐及其法律救濟(jì)問題的研究和探討有著很緊迫的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。本文試從信用證欺詐產(chǎn)生的溫床——信用證制度的獨(dú)立抽象原則，和欺詐的救濟(jì)手段——信用證制度的欺詐例外原則入手，論證對(duì)信用證欺詐進(jìn)行法律救濟(jì)過程中，英美法國(guó)家先進(jìn)的實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)，和我國(guó)存在的主要問題以及解決方案。 引言部分：主要介紹信用證的含義，其獨(dú)立抽象性作為信用證制度的基石，在使信用證制度優(yōu)越于其他類似制度的同時(shí)，也已經(jīng)成為信用證欺詐行騙的溫床。 第一部分：論述信用證欺詐的定義和成因。參照欺詐在普通法判例中概念的界定，和英美成文法和判例法中有關(guān)于信用證欺詐的界定，本文試總結(jié)出信用證欺詐的定義。信用證的欺詐，是指信用證交易的當(dāng)事人，在信用證本身，或信用證交易中的某個(gè)環(huán)節(jié)中，故意曲解事實(shí)真相，包括故意告知他方虛假事實(shí)或者故意隱瞞應(yīng)披露的事實(shí)，從而使他方遭受財(cái)產(chǎn)損失或者使其有受到財(cái)產(chǎn)損失的實(shí)際威脅，并意在使自己從中獲取不法利益的行為。誠(chéng)然，表面上看來(lái)，信用證欺詐行為的低成本，低風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，和高利潤(rùn)使得此種欺詐行為無(wú)本萬(wàn)利，是一項(xiàng)成功率極高的生意。但究其根本，信用證制度的獨(dú)立原則，獨(dú)立原則所蘊(yùn)涵的抽象原則，獨(dú)立抽象原則合二為一進(jìn)而派生出的表面一致原則和嚴(yán)格相符原則是信用證欺詐產(chǎn)生的根源，因?yàn)檫@些原則無(wú)一不為欺詐者得手之后全身而 WP=4 退提供了掩護(hù)。那么拋棄獨(dú)立抽象原則的做法是否可行？無(wú)論對(duì)信用證關(guān)系的哪方當(dāng)事人來(lái)講拋棄這一原則都是弊大于利而根本不敢想象的事情，因?yàn)檎鐭o(wú)因性原則之對(duì)于票據(jù)一樣，獨(dú)立抽象原則具有其存在的必要性，它是整個(gè)信用證制度的基石，信用證制度與其是魚水關(guān)系密不可分。 （獨(dú)立原則→抽象原則→表面一致原則嚴(yán)格相符原則→信用證欺詐） 第二部分：論述信用證欺詐的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和類型研究。 首先，確定信用證欺詐的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，是判斷一個(gè)行為是否構(gòu)成信用證欺詐，能否適用欺詐例外原則的前提，一般只有實(shí)質(zhì)性欺詐法院才可給予禁令。綜觀世界各國(guó)的做法，英美等國(guó)的法官通過判例顯示出他們對(duì)衡量是否構(gòu)成欺詐采用嚴(yán)格標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，強(qiáng)調(diào)欺詐事實(shí)的客觀存在，強(qiáng)調(diào)從維護(hù)信用證的正常運(yùn)行，維護(hù)銀行國(guó)際聲譽(yù)的高度來(lái)審慎地對(duì)待欺詐問題。在此本文暫且提出衡量受益人行為是否構(gòu)成信用證欺詐以至可以啟動(dòng)欺詐例外原則的三個(gè)初步標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，即欺詐行為是否客觀存在；欺詐故意是否存在；欺詐行為是否造成損失和損失的大小。在作出此初步抽象分析之后，第三部分中將對(duì)適用欺詐例外原則的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)做更加深入具體的探討。 其次，本文根據(jù)欺詐受害者的不同，將欺詐大體上分為三大類：受益人可能遇到的欺詐；銀行可能遇到的欺詐；以及開證申請(qǐng)人可能遇到的受益人欺詐三大類型來(lái)研究。 其中受益人可能遇到的欺詐本文總結(jié)有：申請(qǐng)人或開征行利用假冒信用證進(jìn)行欺詐；信用不良的銀行開立真實(shí)但無(wú)償付能力的信用證對(duì)受益人進(jìn)行的欺詐；開證申請(qǐng)人利用信用證軟條款騙取貨物或預(yù)付金、定金、開證手續(xù)費(fèi)。文本繼而在此討論了在通知行未盡合理注意義務(wù)導(dǎo)致受益人遇欺詐情況下，通知行的責(zé)任承擔(dān)問題。如果通知行在主觀上有過錯(cuò)；其未盡合理注意義務(wù)的行為與受益人接受該信用證有因果關(guān)系，并且受益人因此而受到損失的情況下，則通知行應(yīng)該承擔(dān)相應(yīng)的責(zé)任。 銀行可能遇到的欺詐本文總結(jié)有：受益人對(duì)開證行或保兌行的欺詐；開證申請(qǐng)人與受益人對(duì)銀行的合謀欺詐；開證申請(qǐng)人對(duì)開證行的欺詐。 開證申請(qǐng)人可能遇到的受益人欺詐本文總結(jié)有：偽造單據(jù)；涂改單據(jù)（預(yù)借提單、倒簽提單、憑保函換取清潔提單）；用無(wú)提單的方式進(jìn)行欺詐。在預(yù)借提單和倒簽提單情況下，本文認(rèn)定承運(yùn)人的行為構(gòu)成欺詐性侵權(quán)行為，而托 WP=5 運(yùn)人的行為構(gòu)成違約行為和欺詐性侵權(quán)行為的競(jìng)合。另外，針對(duì)憑保函換取清潔提單和用無(wú)提單方式提貨的行為要具體分析，若出于善意則不構(gòu)成欺詐。 第三部分：從借鑒英美成文法和判例法中關(guān)于信用證欺詐的先進(jìn)理論和實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)出發(fā)，論述信用證欺詐例外原則及其司法救濟(jì)。本文認(rèn)為信用證欺詐例外原則的適用有其深厚的理論依據(jù)，在法理上其適用來(lái)源于各國(guó)的公共秩序保留原則、國(guó)際商事法律普遍遵循的誠(chéng)實(shí)信用原則和欺詐使一切歸于無(wú)效的原則。例外原則經(jīng)由美國(guó)里程碑判例Szetjn案和美國(guó)統(tǒng)一商法典第五編信用證篇所確立和肯認(rèn)，并通過著名判例United City Merchants一案在英國(guó)得到普遍接受和認(rèn)可。綜
[Abstract]:The letter of credit instead of commercial credit by bank credit has greatly reduced the risk of settlement in international trade settlement. It is the most widely used way of settlement in international trade, and is also the most important way of financing. It is known as the "blood of life" in international trade.
Since July 1, 1987 in all Chinese bank letter of credit with the credit according to the ICC uniform customs and practices for documentary credit No. 400th terms ", after that Chinese banks officially UCP as international convention to accept Chinese, this piece of land has also been ruthlessly invaded. The letter of credit fraud in recent years, letter of credit fraud involving an increasingly large amount of more than 100 million yuan, the case is not in the minority. This phenomenon has aroused people's attention, it has caused serious harm to the normal trade order and bank settlement order. Especially with China's accession to the WTO, the domestic and international markets to achieve full the letter of credit standards, to study and explore the problems of fraud and its legal remedy has realistic meaning very urgent. This article from the hotbed of fraud of letter of credit - the credit system of independent abstract principle of fraud and remedies -- system of letter of credit fraud exception principle, proof of credit fraud, legal relief process, advanced experience of common law countries, and the main problems existing in our country and the solutions.
The introduction part mainly introduces the meaning of the letter of credit, its independent abstraction as the cornerstone of the letter of credit system, making the letter of credit system superior to other similar systems, and has also become the hotbed of the letter of credit fraud and deception.
The first part discusses the definition and causes of credit fraud fraud. According to definition in common law cases, and the Anglo American statute law and case law on the letter of credit fraud is defined, this paper tries to summarize the definition of credit fraud. The letter of credit fraud, credit refers to the parties in credit the letter of credit itself, a link or the credit in the transaction, intentionally distorted the truth, including other deliberately told false facts or intentionally concealing facts should be disclosed, so that the other party suffered loss of property or the actual threat by property loss, and to make their own benefit from access to illegal behavior. Indeed, on the surface, low cost, low risk of credit fraud, the fraud and high profits make profits, is a very high success rate of the business. But after all, the credit system of the independent In principle, the abstract principles of the principle of independence and the principle of independent and abstract principles are combined into one, and the principle of surface consistency and strict compliance are the root causes of the fraud of letter of credit, because all of these principles are all successful for fraudsters.
WP=4
Provide back cover. Then abandoned the principle of independence of the practice feasible? Is more harm than good and did not dare to imagine things which party regardless of the credit relationship in terms of the abandonment of the principle as WuYinXing principle for the bill, the principle of independence is the necessity of its existence, it is the foundation of credit system, credit system and its relation is inseparable.
(independent principle, abstract principle, strict conformity principle of the principle of surface agreement and credit fraud)
The second part: discuss the criterion and type of the letter of credit fraud.
First, determine the standards of credit fraud, is to determine whether an act constitutes fraud of letter of credit, the premise can apply the principle of fraud exception, only substantial fraud can give the court injunction. In many countries, Britain and other countries to show their judges through cases of fraud by strict measure standard, the objective existence of fraud emphasizes the fact, emphasize from the normal operation and maintenance of credit, the bank to maintain international reputation to careful fraud. This paper put forward a preliminary measure for the three beneficiary acts constitute fraud of letter of credit that can start the fraud exception principle, namely whether fraud exists; the intention of fraud the existence of fraud; whether the loss and the size of the loss. After making the preliminary abstract analysis, the third part of. Use the standard of fraud exception principle to do more in-depth and concrete discussion.
Secondly, according to the difference of fraud victims, fraud is generally divided into three categories: fraud that a beneficiary may encounter, fraud that banks may encounter, and three types of fraudulent fraudulence that the applicant may encounter.
The beneficiary may encounter fraud in this paper are: the applicant or the issuing bank for the use of fake letters of credit fraud; bad credit bank to the beneficiary for real but insolvent credit fraud; the applicant by the soft clause in letter of credit cheat goods or deposit and deposit, the issuing fee on the text. Discussed in the advising bank fails to exercise reasonable care obligations to the beneficiary in the fraud case, assume the responsibility of advising bank. If the advising bank is on the subjective fault; not entirely the duty of reasonable care behavior and benefit people to accept the letter of credit has a causal relationship, and the beneficiaries suffer losses under the condition that the notice should bear the corresponding responsibility.
The fraud that banks may encounter is summarized as follows: the fraud of the beneficiary on the issuing bank or confirming bank; the fraud of the applicant and the beneficiary against the bank; the fraud of the applicant on the issuing bank.
The applicant may encounter fraud in this paper are: forged documents; altered documents (bill of lading, Daoqiantidan, by letter of indemnity for a clean bill of lading); fraud by the bill of lading. Bill of lading in pre and Daoqiantidan, this paper finds the carrier's behavior constituted fraud violations, and support
WP=5
The act of transporting people constitutes a concurrence of breach of contract and fraudulent infringement. In addition, we should specifically analyze the act of exchanging a clean bill of lading with a guarantee, and taking delivery without bill of lading, if it is good faith, it will not constitute fraud.
The third part: from Reference English statute law and case law on the advanced theory and practical experience of credit card fraud, discusses the principle of fraud exception and its judicial relief. This paper argues that the application of the principle of fraud exception has its profound theoretical basis, its application in the legal sources from the principle of reservation of public order. International commercial law generally follow the principle of honesty and credit and fraud makes everything invalid. The principle of exception by the case Szetjn case and milepost UCC article fifth for credit establishment and recognition, and through the famous case of United Merchants case City in the UK are generally accepted and recognized fully.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2003
【分類號(hào)】：D917

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 王艷斌;信用證欺詐例外原則的適用與完善[D];大連海事大學(xué);2011年

2 裴一陽(yáng);信用證欺詐的法律救濟(jì)問題研究[D];上海交通大學(xué);2010年

本文編號(hào)：1608401