论受贿罪“为他人谋取利益”要件之废除

发布时间：2018-01-02 18:15

本文关键词：论受贿罪“为他人谋取利益”要件之废除　出处：《吉林大学》2015年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：近年来，在司法实践中，“收受礼金”、“感情投资”型受贿越来越多，甚至已经到了逢案必遇的地步，认定这类案件需要认定“为他人谋取利益”要件。但是由于这类案件“无承诺、无实施、无结果”，往往很难获取有关证据，犯罪嫌疑人更是经常以此来与侦查部门对抗，经常以“收受礼金”、“感情投资”为由作出辩解。因此，这类受贿案件在实践中很难处理。之所以会在司法实践中产生各种问题，是因为在立法之初，立法者有意将“收受礼金”、“感情投资”排除在受贿犯罪之外。然而，时过境迁，当初的立法规定已经不能适应新的形势。针对司法界和立法界的问题，理论界也有很多争议，争议主要分为“构成要件要素说”和“非构成要件要素说”。其中，“构成要件要素说”又分为“旧客观要件说（行为说）”、“主观要件说（主观说）”、“新客观要件说（承诺说）”、“双重要件说”。然而“构成要件要素说”无论怎么解释“为他人谋取利益”都无法解决司法实践中“收受礼金”、“感情投资”型受贿问题。本文从笔者亲历的一个“收受礼金”、“感情投资”型受贿案件入手，找到解决此类问题的争议焦点就是如何解释“为他人谋取利益”。然后，笔者运用理论研究方法、比较研究方法、历史分析方法、文献研究方法、实践研究方法、调查分析方法、假设分析方法、心理学研究方法等等，对我国目前司法实践中“为他人谋取利益”的理解与适用及存在的问题进行分析论证。然后从“为他人谋取利益”在我国立法上存在的问题，有关“为他人谋取利益”的各种学说，“为他人谋取利益”的理论存在依托即受贿罪的客体，世界其他国家和地区有关受贿罪的横向比较，，我国从古至今的有关受贿罪的立法沿革，删除“为他人谋取利益”可能引发的后果等角度对废除“为他人谋取利益”的可行性进行了全方位的分析论证。经过论证发现，无论采取哪种解释方法，都无法解决司法实践中的“收受礼金”、“感情投资”型受贿问题。于是笔者放弃“解释论”而采用“立法论”。在本文中，笔者论述了我国《刑法修正案（九）（草案）》曾拟增设“收受礼金罪”这一新罪名，并将“收受礼金罪”与受贿罪进行了比较，认为我国没有必要增设“收受礼金罪”，而是应该利用现有罪名（受贿罪）来解决“收受礼金”、“感情投资”问题。从“收受礼金罪”视角来研究受贿罪中“为他人谋取利益”，在我国目前公开发表的论文中是首次论述的。最后，笔者提出立法建议：将我国刑法第385条受贿罪中的“为他人谋取利益”废除。
[Abstract]:In recent years, in the judicial practice, "accept the gift money", "the sentiment investment" type bribery is more and more, even has already reached the situation which every case must meet. The identification of such cases requires the identification of the element "for the benefit of others". However, because such cases are "without commitment, no implementation, no result", it is often difficult to obtain relevant evidence. Criminal suspects often use this to confront the investigation department, often on the grounds of "accepting gifts" and "emotional investment." therefore. This kind of bribery cases are very difficult to deal with in practice. The reason why there are various problems in judicial practice is that at the beginning of legislation, the legislator intended to "accept the gift money". "emotional investment" is excluded from the crime of bribery. However, the current situation has changed, the original legislative provisions have been unable to adapt to the new situation. In view of the problems of the judicial and legislative circles, there are many controversies in the theoretical circle. The dispute is mainly divided into "elements of constitutive elements" and "elements of non-constitutive elements". Among them, "theory of elements of constitutive elements" is divided into "theory of old objective elements (behavior theory)", "theory of subjective elements (subjective theory)". The theory of "new objective elements" and "the theory of double elements". However, "the theory of constitutive elements" "how to interpret" for the benefit of others "can not solve the problem of" accepting gift money "in judicial practice. "emotional investment" type of bribery. This article begins with a case of "accepting gift money" and "emotional investment" type bribery, and finds out how to explain how to "seek benefits for others". The author uses theoretical research methods, comparative research methods, historical analysis methods, literature research methods, practical research methods, investigation and analysis methods, hypothetical analysis methods, psychological research methods and so on. This paper analyzes and demonstrates the understanding and application of "seeking benefits for others" in the current judicial practice of our country and the existing problems, and then analyzes the problems existing in the legislation of "seeking benefits for others" in our country. The theories of "seeking benefits for others" and "seeking benefits for others" exist on the basis of the object of bribery, and the horizontal comparison of bribery crimes in other countries and regions of the world. The legislative evolution of bribery crime in China from ancient to present. The possibility of repealing "seeking benefits for others" is analyzed and demonstrated in all directions from the perspective of the possible consequences of "seeking benefits for others". It is found that no matter which interpretation method is adopted, the feasibility of abolishing "seeking benefits for others" is demonstrated in all directions. Neither of them can solve the problem of "accepting gifts" and "emotional investment" in judicial practice, so the author gives up "explanation theory" and adopts "legislation theory". In this paper, the author discusses that the Criminal Law Amendment (draft) has been proposed to add a new crime of "accepting the gift of money", and the crime of accepting bribes has been compared. The author thinks that it is not necessary to add the crime of accepting gift money in our country, but the crime of accepting bribes should be used to solve the problem. The issue of "emotional investment". It is the first time to study the crime of "seeking benefits for others" in the crime of accepting bribes from the angle of "accepting the gift of money", which is discussed for the first time in the paper published at present in our country. Finally, the author puts forward some legislative suggestions: to abolish the crime of "seeking benefits for others" in article 385 of the Criminal Law of our country.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D924.392

【参考文献】