出售来料加工贸易报关单证行为的刑法性质分析——恒通公司走私普通货物案分析

Analysis of the nature of criminal law sale processing trade declaration behavior——The case of smuggling goods Hengtong company

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属院系:

法学院

作者:

孙莉莉

导师:

张武举

导师单位:

法学院

学位:

硕士

语种:

其他

关键词:

走私普通货物罪;通谋;共同犯罪;既遂标准

摘要:

走私犯罪历来都是各国打击的重点,其不仅侵犯了海关对外贸易监管制度,也造成了国家关税税款的巨额流失。目前走私犯罪手段多样且不断翻新,特别是行为人利用可以保税或减免税进口货物的方式,隐瞒海关将本应以一般方式进口的货物以上述方式进口,偷逃应缴税款,是司法实践中较为常见的走私方式。本文以恒通公司出售来料加工贸易报关单证一案为分析样本,探讨有进出口经营权的企业出售报关单证的行为是否成立犯罪,能否推定其与走私罪犯事前通谋、成立共同犯罪,在该企业为平衡手册骗取海关核销的情况下,如何认定骗取海关核销的行为性质。本文共两万余字,主分四个部分:第一部分,案件基本情况概述。主要包括案由、案情简介、分歧意见和争议焦点介绍。在介绍案情的基础上,文章着重归纳了三个方面的争议问题。其一,关于恒通公司出售报关单证行为的定性争议,应构成走私普通货物罪还是非法经营罪;其二,关于能否推定恒通公司与华来、贵森公司存在事前通谋的争议,一种意见认为可以推知恒通公司主观上对于华来、贵森公司走私的事实是明知的,另一种意见认为根据案情无法推知其主观明知,不存在事前通谋;其三,恒通公司骗取海关核销的行为如何定性的争议,构成事后不可罚行为还是应定罪处罚。第二部分,法理分析。主要从三个方面就本案涉及的法律问题进行法理分析。 其一,通过分析刑法中的行为理论,阐述走私普通货物犯罪的行为要素;其二,结合通谋的性质认定、通谋与共同犯罪成立的关系理论,论述如何推定行为人与后续走私普通货物罪犯事前通谋、成立共同犯罪;其三,依据犯罪既遂理论,讨论后续走私普通货物犯罪既遂的认定标准;第四,依据事后不可罚行为理论和犯罪构成理论,分析后续走私普通货物犯罪中的骗取海关核销行为是否应定罪处罚。第三部分,本案研究结论。主要包括案件本身的研究结论、法院处理意见评述。其一,从走私普通货物行为、主观方面、既遂标准和罪数理论四个方面进行全面分析,得出结论,对于出售报关单证的行为,可以推定恒通公司事前通谋,应与走私罪犯成立走私普通货物共同犯罪,对于骗取海关核销的行为应以走私普通货物罪定罪处罚;其二,本文认为二审驳回申诉通知中适用走私普通货物罪共同犯罪的意见是妥当的,但是恒通公司骗取海关核销的行为不应只作为量刑情节考虑,应以走私普通货物罪追究责任。第四部分,本案研究启示。主要包括其一,针对走私犯罪现象频发,建议加强海关监管、合理降低关税;其二,针对走私普通货物罪的刑罚设置不平衡、刑罚种类单一,建议对自然人和单位适用同一刑罚档次、增设资格刑;其三,针对司法解释对于后续走私普通货物犯罪的认定标准有违刑法基本理论,建议修改。

参考文献:

45

学科:

刑法学

提交日期

2019-04-11

引用参考

孙莉莉. 出售来料加工贸易报关单证行为的刑法性质分析——恒通公司走私普通货物案分析[D]. 西南政法大学,2016.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 出售来料加工贸易报关单证行为的刑法性质分析——恒通公司走私普通货物案分析
  • dc.title
  • Analysis of the nature of criminal law sale processing trade declaration behavior——The case of smuggling goods Hengtong company
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20140042011137
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 孙莉莉
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法律硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2016
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 张武举
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.language.iso
  • 其他
  • dc.subject
  • 走私普通货物罪;通谋;共同犯罪;既遂标准
  • dc.subject
  • The crime of smuggling ordinary goods;Collusion;Common crime;The standard of accomplishment
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 走私犯罪历来都是各国打击的重点,其不仅侵犯了海关对外贸易监管制度,也造成了国家关税税款的巨额流失。目前走私犯罪手段多样且不断翻新,特别是行为人利用可以保税或减免税进口货物的方式,隐瞒海关将本应以一般方式进口的货物以上述方式进口,偷逃应缴税款,是司法实践中较为常见的走私方式。本文以恒通公司出售来料加工贸易报关单证一案为分析样本,探讨有进出口经营权的企业出售报关单证的行为是否成立犯罪,能否推定其与走私罪犯事前通谋、成立共同犯罪,在该企业为平衡手册骗取海关核销的情况下,如何认定骗取海关核销的行为性质。本文共两万余字,主分四个部分:第一部分,案件基本情况概述。主要包括案由、案情简介、分歧意见和争议焦点介绍。在介绍案情的基础上,文章着重归纳了三个方面的争议问题。其一,关于恒通公司出售报关单证行为的定性争议,应构成走私普通货物罪还是非法经营罪;其二,关于能否推定恒通公司与华来、贵森公司存在事前通谋的争议,一种意见认为可以推知恒通公司主观上对于华来、贵森公司走私的事实是明知的,另一种意见认为根据案情无法推知其主观明知,不存在事前通谋;其三,恒通公司骗取海关核销的行为如何定性的争议,构成事后不可罚行为还是应定罪处罚。第二部分,法理分析。主要从三个方面就本案涉及的法律问题进行法理分析。 其一,通过分析刑法中的行为理论,阐述走私普通货物犯罪的行为要素;其二,结合通谋的性质认定、通谋与共同犯罪成立的关系理论,论述如何推定行为人与后续走私普通货物罪犯事前通谋、成立共同犯罪;其三,依据犯罪既遂理论,讨论后续走私普通货物犯罪既遂的认定标准;第四,依据事后不可罚行为理论和犯罪构成理论,分析后续走私普通货物犯罪中的骗取海关核销行为是否应定罪处罚。第三部分,本案研究结论。主要包括案件本身的研究结论、法院处理意见评述。其一,从走私普通货物行为、主观方面、既遂标准和罪数理论四个方面进行全面分析,得出结论,对于出售报关单证的行为,可以推定恒通公司事前通谋,应与走私罪犯成立走私普通货物共同犯罪,对于骗取海关核销的行为应以走私普通货物罪定罪处罚;其二,本文认为二审驳回申诉通知中适用走私普通货物罪共同犯罪的意见是妥当的,但是恒通公司骗取海关核销的行为不应只作为量刑情节考虑,应以走私普通货物罪追究责任。第四部分,本案研究启示。主要包括其一,针对走私犯罪现象频发,建议加强海关监管、合理降低关税;其二,针对走私普通货物罪的刑罚设置不平衡、刑罚种类单一,建议对自然人和单位适用同一刑罚档次、增设资格刑;其三,针对司法解释对于后续走私普通货物犯罪的认定标准有违刑法基本理论,建议修改。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • Smuggling crime has always been the focus of the fight against the country, which not only violated the customs supervision system of foreign trade, but also caused the huge loss of the national tariff tax. Criminal means of smuggling of criminals are diverse and constantly refurbished,in particular, human behavior using bonded or tax reduction and exemption for imported goods, conceal the customs will be to general imported goods to the import, evasion should pay taxes,which is a common way of smuggling in judicial practice.This paper sold at Hengtong company do processing trade declaration documents a case samples for analysis,to explore the right to operate import and export enterprises to sale declaration documentsbehavior of crime, whether presumption and smuggling offender of collusion, the establishment of joint crime,in this enterprise to balance handbook false verification, decide how to fake verification behavior nature of criminal law.In this paper,a total of more than twenty thousand words, this paper mainly divided into four parts:The first part, the basic situation of the case.Including the basic introduction of the case, the cause of the disagreement, the focus of controversy.On the basis of the introduction of the case, the article focuses on three aspects of the dispute.Firstly,aqualitative controversy about the Hengtong company sale declaration documents act, shall constitute the crime of smuggling ordinary goods or the crime of illegal business;secondly, the presumption about whether Hengtong company exist beforehand conspires with Hualai company and Guisen company, an opinion that can infer Hengtong company subjective for Hualai company and Guisen company smuggling facts is knowing, a second opinion that according to the case cannot be inferred from the subjective knowledge, there is no conspirator;thirdly, how the behavior of the qualitative Hengtong company to defraud the customs cancel after verification of controversy, form later punishment behavior or no should be convicted and punished.The second part, the legal theory analysis .The legal issues involved in this case, mainly from three aspects of legal analysis.Firstly, through analysis the action of the criminal law theory, the paper expounds the smuggling ordinary goods crime elements;secondly, combining conspires decided that the properties of seeks the relationship was established with joint crime theory, discusses how to presumption of the offender and the follow-up smuggling ordinary goods criminal conspiracy beforehand sense, set up a joint crime;thirdly, based on the theory of crime accomplishment, to discuss the follow-up smuggling ordinary goods standards crime accomplishment;tourth, based on the theory of crime number, and afterwards not punish behavior theory, analysis of the follow-up smuggling ordinary goods to defraud the customs cancel after verification of criminal behavior whether should be convicted and punished.The third part, the research conclusion to the case.Including the case itself, the conclusion of the study, the court comments.Firstly, from smuggling ordinary goods behavior, subjective aspect, with the standard and the theory of crime number four aspects to conduct a comprehensive analysis,draw the conclusion,Hengtong company's behavior should constitute the crime of smuggling ordinary goods, can be presumed Hengtong company conspirators, and criminals of smuggling establishment common crime,Hengtong company false verification acts constitute the crime of smuggling ordinary goods;secondly, this paper argues that the second instance rejected the views of the notice of appeal for smuggling ordinary goods crime is appropriate, but Hengtong company false verification should not only as a sentencing consideration shall be investigated for responsibility in the crime of smuggling ordinary goods.The fourth part, the research of the case.Mainly including one, for the frequent smuggling of crime, it is recommended to strengthen Customs’ supervision, reasonable tariff reduction;secondly, for the crime of smuggling ordinary goods, the penalty is not balanced, the punishment of a single type, it is recommended to the natural person and unit applicable to the same level of punishment, the additional qualification penalty;thirdly, in view of the judicial interpretation on subsequent smuggling ordinary goods standard of crime against the basic theory of criminal law, suggest to modify.
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D
  • dc.description.sponsorship
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2026-04-10
  • dc.date.oralDefense
  • 2016-05-02
  • dc.relation.citedreferences
  • 45
  • dc.relation.relatedpublications
  • 引言 1一、案件的基本情况 3(一)案由 3(二)案情介绍 3(三)分歧意见 4(四)争议焦点 5二、相关问题的法理分析 5(一)走私普通货物行为分析 5(二)走私普通货物罪与相关犯罪的界限 8(三)事前通谋型共同犯罪的法理分析 11(四)后续走私普通货物罪的既遂标准认定 13(五)我国罪数理论分析 16三、本案的研究结论 18(一)出售来料加工贸易报关单证成立走私普通货物共犯行为 18(二)骗取海关核销的行为应以走私普通货物罪定罪处罚 21(三)对法院判决的评析及处理意见 24四、本案研究的启示 25(一)加强海关监管,合理降低关税 25(二)完善走私普通货物罪刑罚设置,增设资格刑 26(三)修改司法解释,合理认定既遂标准 27参考文献 28致谢 30
回到顶部