论盗窃罪与侵占罪的区别

发布时间：2018-02-01 02:34

本文关键词： 盗窃罪侵占罪占有　出处：《中国青年政治学院》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：盗窃罪和侵占罪都是常见的侵犯财产型的罪名,在当今这个市场经济飞速发展的社会,司法机关对经济型犯罪的关注也日益显著。现在的经济发展逐渐复杂,所以经济犯罪的模式和形态也随之呈现多样性,在许多案件中不仅仅包含一种经济犯罪行为,也存在部分财产性犯罪是多种手段相互交叉,多个罪名重合或者不易区分。盗窃罪和侵占罪就是可能存在混淆的两个罪名,但是这两个罪名之间却存在着一种排他的关系,即一个犯罪行为如果构成了盗窃罪,就不可能再次构成侵占罪。然而,近年来越来越多复杂的案件类型让司法工作人员不易明确的界定这两者的界限,例如许霆案件,梁丽案件就是如此,它们都引起了刑法界的一次学理讨论。梁丽案件成为2009年中国十大法制事件之一,在当时引发了广泛的社会关注,是一个典型的盗窃罪和侵占罪容易混淆认定的案例,当时的公安机关最初以盗窃罪将梁丽移送至检察院,然而最后检察机关却以“侵占罪”定性并以告诉才处理为由撤销了案件。因此,本文作者意在由一个著名案例:梁丽捡拾百万黄金案为出发点引出文章主题,即盗窃罪与侵占罪的区别,全文主要从三个方面对比盗窃罪和侵占罪的不同之处进行对比:第一部分是对盗窃罪和侵占罪的犯罪对象的不同进行介绍,主要从动产、不动产、埋藏物、遗忘物和财产性利益几个方面进行界定,在对比中使用了一些小案例更清晰生动地说明不同之处。第二部分介绍了在盗窃罪与侵占罪的客观方面的差异,盗窃罪主要是窃取他人的财产为自己所有,侵犯的主要是占有人财物的所有权,而侵占罪的行为人在最初占有财物是基于合法的目的,但是占有过程中产生了非法所有的目的并加以实施,并且它比盗窃罪多了一个构成要件,即“拒不退还”。第三部分主要阐述了区分盗窃罪和侵占罪的关键性条件——“占有”的认定,主要介绍了刑法领域内“占有”的概念及构成,包括了占有的分类,占有涵盖的四方面要素,也指出了占有发生的五种合法原因,并列出了一些例子来论证盗窃罪和侵占罪中几种比较特殊的占有关系,主要有死者的占有问题、特殊场合的占有转化问题以及上下级之间的占有问题。
[Abstract]:Theft and embezzlement are common crimes of infringing on property. In the society with the rapid development of market economy, the judicial organs pay more and more attention to the economic crimes. Now the economic development is becoming more and more complicated. Therefore, the patterns and forms of economic crime also present diversity. In many cases, there is not only an economic crime, but also a part of property crime is a variety of means intersecting each other. Larceny and embezzlement are two possible confounding charges, but there is an exclusive relationship between them. That is, if a criminal act constitutes theft, it is impossible to constitute embezzlement again. However, in recent years, more and more complex cases make it difficult for judicial staff to clearly define the boundaries between the two. For example, Xu Ting case, Liang Li case is such, they have aroused a theoretical discussion in the criminal law field. Liang Li case became one of the top ten legal events in China in 2009, which caused widespread social concern at that time. It is a typical case of theft and embezzlement. At that time, the public security organ initially transferred Liang Li to the procuratorate with the crime of larceny. However, in the end, the procuratorial organ dismissed the case on the grounds of "embezzlement" and dealt with it on the grounds of telling. Therefore, the author intends to draw the theme of the article from a famous case: Liang Li's case of picking up millions of gold. That is, the difference between theft and embezzlement, this paper mainly compares the difference between theft and embezzlement from three aspects: the first part is to introduce the different objects of theft and embezzlement. Mainly from movable property, real estate, buried objects, forgotten objects and property interests to define several aspects. The second part introduces the difference between theft and embezzlement. Theft is mainly to steal the property of others for their own. The main infringement is the possession of property ownership, while the crime of embezzlement in the initial possession of property is based on the legal purpose, but the possession process produced illegal all purposes and to be implemented. And it is more than the crime of larceny a constituent element, that is, "refuse to return". The third part mainly elaborated the distinction between theft and embezzlement of the key conditions-"possession" of the determination. This paper mainly introduces the concept and constitution of "possession" in the field of criminal law, including the classification of possession, the four elements covered by possession, and also points out the five legal reasons of possession. Some examples are given to demonstrate the special possession relationship between theft and embezzlement, including the possession of the deceased, the conversion of possession on special occasions and the problem of possession between superior and subordinate.
【学位授予单位】：中国青年政治学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.35

【参考文献】