不法原因给付影响财产罪认定研究

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:

唐蕾阅

导师:

卢有学

导师单位:

法学院

学位:

硕士

语种:

中文

关键词:

不法原因给付;财产罪;违法性;刑民关系;返还请求权

摘要:

不法原因给付制度作为一项民法概念,由于其具有的财产性质,与刑法中的财产犯罪紧密联系,实践中,诸如侵占、诈骗、敲诈勒索、抢夺盗赃款、物等行为并不少见,所以就存在讨论不法原因给付行为对侵犯财产罪的影响的必要性。(不法原因给付与侵犯财产罪关系的必要性。)(不法原因给付制度起源于罗马法,)古罗马法是不法原因给付的渊源,后又为大陆法系国家所继承。法国、德国、日本、意大利等国家对此均有规定,但我国民法并没有规定不法原因给付,这就导致了我国缺失判断不法原因给付行为的法律依据。当不法原因给付行为同时触犯到财产犯罪时,往往易成为司法难点。要解决这一问题,不仅要从法秩序究竟是一元论还是相对论上去判断,还要回归刑法具体规定,综合分析财产犯罪的保护法益、非法占有目的以及若干不法原因给付会影响财产罪认定的具体因素,从而对这一问题提出具体的判断标准。全文分为五个部分: 第一部分,“不法原因给付概述”,主要对不法原因给付是什么、如何界定、发展历史、后果等进行梳理。不法原因给付是指基于违反强行法规定及公序良俗而为的给付,其重点在于这种财产给付的原因即动机存在不法。日本刑法学界还曾提出了“不法原因委托”,以求解释侵占“不法原因给付物”是否构成侵占罪的难题,但是日本民法学界对这种概念并不承认。不法原因给付的,除非仅领受方一方存在不法原因,否自应该否定给付人的返还请求权。 第二部分,“不法原因给付场合下财产罪基础理论研究”,主要从宏观的、刑法的角度出发,对刑民违法性判断是否一致、财产罪的保护法益、不法原因给付中财产的认定、非法占有目的等进行梳理。刑民的违法性判断具有一致性,我国刑法保护所有权及部分占有权,对于盗窃、抢夺、诈骗、侵占违禁品、财产性利益的也应当构成相应的财产罪。 第三部分,“不法原因给付影响财产罪认定的具体因素”,主要从微观的、刑民交叉的角度出发,对不法原因给付的占有状态、后果、领受双发违法性大小对财产罪的影响进行梳理。对于行为人合法所有的财物,若构成不法原因给付的,属于侵犯国家财产,当构成财产罪;无法构成不法原因给付的,财产属于行为人合法所有的,不应当构成财产罪。对于行为人非法所有的财物,构成不法原因给付的,视情况构成相应的财产犯罪或者赃物罪。因不法原因给付而丧失了返还请求权的并不必然丧失所有权,国家仍然享有对赃物的收缴权,对之予以侵犯,仍然可构成财产罪。只有在不法原因给付领受方的违法性明显偏大的时候才能否定给付人的返还请求权。 第四部分,“不法原因给付与具体的侵犯财产罪”,主要分析了德国、日本以及我国对不法原因给付与侵占、诈骗罪的司法判例和判决,从而对比国内外司法实践的差别和提出我国司法实践中存在的问题。实践中,我国法院大多数不认定不法原因给付的返还请求权,但也有判决认为不法原因给付的标的物为赃物而依法予以没收。并且在司法实践中,绝大多数情况下,法院认定不法原因给付不得请求返还,通过欺骗手段引诱他人实施不法原因给付行为的,应当按照诈骗罪定罪处罚。但当前我国关于不法原因给付对侵占罪的影响判决却很少,与其他财产罪相关的判决也为数不多。

学科:

刑法学

提交日期

2019-06-04

引用参考

唐蕾阅. 不法原因给付影响财产罪认定研究[D]. 西南政法大学,2019.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 不法原因给付影响财产罪认定研究
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20160301040217
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 唐蕾阅
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法学硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2019
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 卢有学
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 不法原因给付;财产罪;违法性;刑民关系;返还请求权
  • dc.subject
  • Illegal cause payment;Property crime;Illegality;Criminal &Civil law relationship;Return claim
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 不法原因给付制度作为一项民法概念,由于其具有的财产性质,与刑法中的财产犯罪紧密联系,实践中,诸如侵占、诈骗、敲诈勒索、抢夺盗赃款、物等行为并不少见,所以就存在讨论不法原因给付行为对侵犯财产罪的影响的必要性。(不法原因给付与侵犯财产罪关系的必要性。)(不法原因给付制度起源于罗马法,)古罗马法是不法原因给付的渊源,后又为大陆法系国家所继承。法国、德国、日本、意大利等国家对此均有规定,但我国民法并没有规定不法原因给付,这就导致了我国缺失判断不法原因给付行为的法律依据。当不法原因给付行为同时触犯到财产犯罪时,往往易成为司法难点。要解决这一问题,不仅要从法秩序究竟是一元论还是相对论上去判断,还要回归刑法具体规定,综合分析财产犯罪的保护法益、非法占有目的以及若干不法原因给付会影响财产罪认定的具体因素,从而对这一问题提出具体的判断标准。全文分为五个部分: 第一部分,“不法原因给付概述”,主要对不法原因给付是什么、如何界定、发展历史、后果等进行梳理。不法原因给付是指基于违反强行法规定及公序良俗而为的给付,其重点在于这种财产给付的原因即动机存在不法。日本刑法学界还曾提出了“不法原因委托”,以求解释侵占“不法原因给付物”是否构成侵占罪的难题,但是日本民法学界对这种概念并不承认。不法原因给付的,除非仅领受方一方存在不法原因,否自应该否定给付人的返还请求权。 第二部分,“不法原因给付场合下财产罪基础理论研究”,主要从宏观的、刑法的角度出发,对刑民违法性判断是否一致、财产罪的保护法益、不法原因给付中财产的认定、非法占有目的等进行梳理。刑民的违法性判断具有一致性,我国刑法保护所有权及部分占有权,对于盗窃、抢夺、诈骗、侵占违禁品、财产性利益的也应当构成相应的财产罪。 第三部分,“不法原因给付影响财产罪认定的具体因素”,主要从微观的、刑民交叉的角度出发,对不法原因给付的占有状态、后果、领受双发违法性大小对财产罪的影响进行梳理。对于行为人合法所有的财物,若构成不法原因给付的,属于侵犯国家财产,当构成财产罪;无法构成不法原因给付的,财产属于行为人合法所有的,不应当构成财产罪。对于行为人非法所有的财物,构成不法原因给付的,视情况构成相应的财产犯罪或者赃物罪。因不法原因给付而丧失了返还请求权的并不必然丧失所有权,国家仍然享有对赃物的收缴权,对之予以侵犯,仍然可构成财产罪。只有在不法原因给付领受方的违法性明显偏大的时候才能否定给付人的返还请求权。 第四部分,“不法原因给付与具体的侵犯财产罪”,主要分析了德国、日本以及我国对不法原因给付与侵占、诈骗罪的司法判例和判决,从而对比国内外司法实践的差别和提出我国司法实践中存在的问题。实践中,我国法院大多数不认定不法原因给付的返还请求权,但也有判决认为不法原因给付的标的物为赃物而依法予以没收。并且在司法实践中,绝大多数情况下,法院认定不法原因给付不得请求返还,通过欺骗手段引诱他人实施不法原因给付行为的,应当按照诈骗罪定罪处罚。但当前我国关于不法原因给付对侵占罪的影响判决却很少,与其他财产罪相关的判决也为数不多。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • As a civil law concept, the illegal cause payment system is closely related to property crimes in criminal law because of its property nature. In practice, such acts as encroachment, fraud, extortion, robbing of stolen money, and things are not uncommon, so it is not uncommon. There is a need to discuss the relationship between unlawful reasons and the crime of infringement of property. The lawless payment system originated in Roman law and was later inherited by civil law countries. France, Germany, Japan, Italy and other countries have regulations on this, but China does not provide for illegal reasons, which leads to the lack of legal judgment and standards for the payment of illegal causes in China. When property crimes involve illegal cause payment, it is often difficult to become a judicial difficulty. To solve this problem, we must not only judge whether the legal order is monism or relativity, but also return to the specific provisions of the criminal law, comprehensively analyze the legal interests of property crimes, the purpose of illegal possession, and the specific factors that determine the crimes of property crimes. To put forward specific criteria for judging this issue. The full text is divided into five parts: The first part, “Overview of the illegal cause payment”, is mainly to sort out the development history, concepts and consequences of the illegal cause payment. The illegal cause of payment refers to the payment based on the violation of the law of the forcible law and the order of the public order. The main point is that the reason for the payment of this property is that the motivation is illegal. Japanese criminal law scholars have also proposed the concept of unreasonable reasons to solve the problem of encroaching on "the illegal cause of payment", but the Japanese civil law scholars do not recognize this concept. In case of unlawful reasons, in principle, the right of return of the payer should be denied. If there is only one party to the wrong cause, the exception is. The second part, "Study on the basic theory of property crime under the circumstances of illegal law payment", mainly from the perspective of macroscopic and criminal law, whether the judgment of criminal offenders is consistent, the legal protection of property crimes, the identification of property in the wrongful cause, Illegal possession purposes are sorted out. The criminal law's illegal judgment is consistent. China's criminal law protects ownership and partial possession. It should also constitute a corresponding property crime for theft, looting, fraud, encroachment on contraband and property interests. The third part, "The specific factors of the crime of insolvency of property caused by illegal cause payment", mainly from the perspective of microscopic, criminal and civil cross, the state of possession of the illegal reasons, the consequences, and the impact of the double-legal illegality on property crimes. Carding. If the property owned by the actor is legally owed to the illegal cause payment, it is a violation of the state property and constitutes a property crime. For the illegal property owned by the actor, which constitutes illegal cause payment, it shall constitute a corresponding property crime or stolen goods as the case may be. If the right to return is lost due to unlawful reasons, it does not necessarily lose ownership. The state still enjoys the right to seize the stolen goods and infringes it, and it can still constitute property crime. The fourth part, " illegal cause payment and Specific Crimes of Property Violation", mainly analyzes the judicial precedents and judgments of Germany, Japan and China on the crimes of illegal causes and encroachment and fraud, comparing the differences between domestic and foreign judicial practice and proposing China. In practice, most of the courts in our country do not recognize the right to return claims for illegal cause payment, but there are also cases in which the subject matter that the judgment considers that the unlawful cause is a stolen property and is confiscated according to law. Moreover, in judicial practice, in the vast majority of cases, if the court finds that the illegal cause of payment cannot be requested to be returned, and deceives others to commit the act of illegal cause payment, it shall be convicted and punished according to the crime of fraud. However, at present, there are few judgments on the impact of illegal lawfulness on the crime of embezzlement, and there are not many judgments related to other property crimes
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2026-01-14
回到顶部