民事合同欺诈与合同诈骗罪界分的表达路径

发布时间：2018-06-15 04:25

本文选题：民事合同欺诈 + 合同诈骗罪　；参考：《理论与改革》2015年06期

【摘要】：民事合同欺诈与合同诈骗罪的界限模糊,容易导致司法乱象。在审判原则方面应遵循民事赔偿优先原则与刑法谦抑原则。在审理路径方面首先应考虑构成要件,前者的主观故意内容是"牟利",行为人企图通过履行合同来骗取不法利益;后者则以"非法占有目的"为主观方面的必要内容,行为人客观上没有履行合同的行为。虽然在理论上二者界限分明,但在实践上依然存在"模糊地带",社会矛盾依然存在。此外,还应从民刑责任的功能以及司法成本上分析,民事合同欺诈侧重于对当事人的赔偿,通过较低社会成本就能达到良好的社会效果;合同诈骗罪则因以预防和惩罚功能为主并且司法成本更高,并不能很好的解决社会矛盾。
[Abstract]:The boundary between civil contract fraud and contract fraud is blurred, which easily leads to judicial disorder. In the trial principle, we should follow the civil compensation priority principle and the criminal law modesty principle. In the trial path, we should first consider the constitutive elements. The former's subjective and intentional content is "making profit", the actor attempts to defraud the illegal interests by performing the contract, while the latter takes "the purpose of illegal possession" as the necessary subjective content. The act of objectively failing to fulfill the contract. Although the two boundaries are clear in theory, in practice there is still a "fuzzy zone", and social contradictions still exist. In addition, it should be analyzed from the functions of civil liability and judicial costs, civil contract fraud focuses on the compensation of the parties, through the lower social costs can achieve good social effects; The crime of contract fraud is not a good solution to the social contradiction because of the prevention and punishment function and the higher judicial cost.
【作者单位】：内蒙古大学;
【基金】：内蒙古哲学社会科学规划项目:内蒙古地区中小企业商标战略法律保障研究(编号:2014C096);项目负责人:唐小冬
【分类号】：D924.3;D923.6

【参考文献】