陈某合同诈骗案研究

发布时间：2018-09-09 09:22

【摘要】：市场经济活动中，不可避免地存在着大量的合同纠纷和争议。其中的一些违反了合同法的规定，相关当事人要承担一定的民事责任，而还有一部分不仅侵犯了民事法律关系，而且严重地侵犯了市场经济秩序和他人的合法财产所有权，这是为我国刑法所不允许的。1997年刑法第二百二十四条将合同诈骗罪从诈骗罪中分离出来，明确设立了合同诈骗罪，从而规范经济活动中的欺诈犯罪。经历了十余年的经济生活的考验，合同诈骗犯罪的认定仍然存在不少的难点，而最大的难点莫过于对非法占有故意的认定。陈某合同诈骗案是笔者在日常工作中办理的一件典型的合同诈骗案件。该案涉及了合同诈骗犯罪的两个最大的难点和重点：一是非法占有的故意，二是合同诈骗与合同纠纷的区别。实际上，从司法实践来看，无论是非法占有的故意和合同诈骗与合同纠纷的区别，最终都能从行为人的主观故意中找到突破口。也即是说，合同诈骗的主观方面是当事人是否构成犯罪、构成此罪与彼罪的最重要的衡量要素。而实际是，在司法活动中，主观方面的取证大都还依赖着行为人及相关当事人的言辞证据，在刑诉法修改后，这种调查取证方式将不再适应新的需要。那么如何突破主观方面的束缚就成为司法者必须面对的问题。本文将以陈某合同诈骗案为切入点，深刻探讨合同诈骗犯罪的主观方面认定的相关问题。以陈某合同诈骗犯罪为载体，深入地论述了司法实践中合同诈骗犯罪认定的难点，即非法占有目的的认定以及与合同纠纷的区别。本文开篇即对陈某合同诈骗案进行了分析，并引出了本文将探讨的问题。在第二部分探讨了法学理论中非法占有目的与合同纠纷区别的理论，并得出了司法实践中最为合理的学说。第三部分通过另外的两起相似的合同诈骗案例与陈某案件相形成对比，最终得出了实践中办理此类案件的方法与经验。并在第四部分予以详细论述。本文的目的不在于对合同诈骗案件本身进行理论性的探讨，也不在于用一个典型案件概括整类经济案件，而仅仅是通过实践中的案例进行深入的、理性的思考，尽可能地找出办理此类案件的通用侦查、审查手段，，为实践中办理此类案件积累经验，以便提高诉讼效率，提高办理案件的准确率，保证案件质量。
[Abstract]:In the market economy activities, there are inevitably a large number of contract disputes and disputes. Some of them violate the provisions of the contract Law, and the relevant parties have to bear certain civil liabilities, while some of them not only violate the civil legal relations, but also seriously violate the market economic order and the legal property ownership of others. Article 224 of 1997 Criminal Law separates the crime of contract fraud from the crime of fraud, and clearly establishes the crime of contract fraud, thus standardizing the crime of fraud in economic activities. After more than ten years of economic life, there are still many difficulties in the identification of contract fraud, and the biggest difficulty is the determination of illegal possession. Chen Mou contract fraud case is a typical contract fraud case handled by the author in daily work. The case involves two major difficulties and emphases in the crime of contract fraud: one is the intention of illegal possession, the other is the difference between contract fraud and contract dispute. In fact, from the judicial practice, whether illegal possession of intent and contract fraud and contract disputes, ultimately can find a breakthrough from the subjective intent of the perpetrator. That is to say, the subjective aspect of contract fraud is whether the parties constitute a crime and constitute the most important measure of this crime and that crime. In fact, in the judicial activities, the subjective aspect of the evidence is also dependent on the perpetrator and the relevant parties of the verbal evidence, after the revision of the Criminal procedure Law, this investigation and evidence will no longer adapt to the new needs. So how to break through the constraints of the subjective aspects of the judiciary must be faced with the problem. This article will take Chen Mou contract fraud case as the breakthrough point, deeply discusses the contract fraud crime subjective aspect cognizance correlation question. Taking Chen Mou contract fraud crime as the carrier, this paper deeply discusses the difficulties in the identification of contract fraud crime in judicial practice, that is, the identification of the purpose of illegal possession and the difference between the crime and the contract dispute. At the beginning of this paper, the author analyzes Chen's contract fraud, and leads to the problems to be discussed in this paper. In the second part, the author discusses the theory of the difference between the purpose of illegal possession and the contract dispute in the legal theory, and draws the most reasonable theory in the judicial practice. The third part through the other two similar cases of contract fraud and Chen case to form a contrast, and finally obtained the practice of handling such cases and experience. And in the fourth part to give a detailed discussion. The purpose of this paper is not to probe into the contract fraud case itself theoretically, nor to generalize the whole economic case with a typical case, but to think deeply and rationally through the practical cases. As far as possible, we can find out the general investigation and examine means of dealing with such cases, accumulate experience for handling such cases in practice, so as to improve the efficiency of litigation, improve the accuracy of handling cases, and ensure the quality of cases.
【学位授予单位】：黑龙江大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D924

【参考文献】