金融欺诈犯罪立法研究

发布时间：2018-02-07 13:50

本文关键词： 金融欺诈金融诈骗非法占有目的立法模式　出处：《华东政法大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：本文所要研究的是金融诈骗罪的立法修正问题。我国的金融诈骗罪在构成要件上继承了诈骗罪的构成要件模式，主观上要求非法占有目的。但在实践中，金融诈骗罪的非法占有目的的证明遇到了很大的困难，以至于不得不依赖于事后推定。但推定的适用违背了非法占有目的的初衷，形成了立法上要求非法占有目的，司法上化解非法占有目的的悖论。本文认为通过推定无法彻底解决这一问题。本文认为，司法中出现的问题是由于立法的缺陷造成的。金融欺诈活动是一种不同于传统诈骗犯罪的犯罪活动，其危害性不通过非法占有的目的表现出来，其非法占有目的的诉讼证明难度也不同于传统诈骗罪。非法占有目的在金融诈骗罪中的盲目扩张不仅造成了诉讼证明的困难，而且导致金融诈骗罪的量刑过重，出现了刑罚厉而不严的效果。本文在广泛考察各国金融欺诈犯罪的立法，并充分分析了现有的研究成果之后，提出应当用金融欺诈犯罪取代现有的金融诈骗罪。欺诈作为来源于民法的概念，一般被作为民事侵权行为。但在市场经济体制下，越来越多的欺诈活动被作为犯罪处罚，这就是欺诈的犯罪化。欺诈和诈骗都以虚假陈述为手段，其区别在于：前者不具有非法占有目的，后者具有非法占有目的；前者以违法民事和行政管理法规为前提，，带有行政犯的性质，后者是单纯的法定犯；前者在证明上较为简单，后者的诉讼证明较为困难。在金融领域，虚假陈述行为的危害日益扩大，各国均将金融活动中的欺诈行为作为犯罪处罚，我国也是如此。但西方各国一般采用欺诈犯罪的立法模式，主观上不要求非法占有目的，客观上只要求具有虚假陈述行为，而我国刑法仅在证券领域采用了欺诈犯罪的立法模式，而对欺诈金融机构的犯罪采用了诈骗罪的立法模式。本文主张取消金融诈骗罪，代之以金融欺诈罪，以降低证明难度，并降低其法定刑。本文的第一章分析了金融诈骗罪的司法困境和刑事司法推定的弊端；第二章对金融欺诈犯罪的立法模式进行了深入的研究和论证；第三章对未来可能进行的立法模式修改提出了初步构想，以期抛砖引玉。
[Abstract]:This article is to study the legislative amendment of the crime of financial fraud. The crime of financial fraud in our country inherits the constitutive elements model of the crime of fraud, subjectively requires the purpose of illegal possession, but in practice, the crime of financial fraud inherits the mode of constitutive elements of the crime of fraud. The proof of the purpose of illegal possession of the crime of financial fraud has encountered great difficulties, so that it has to rely on the posteriori presumption. However, the application of the presumption violates the original intention of the purpose of illegal possession and forms the legislative requirement for the purpose of illegal possession. Judicial solution to the paradox of the purpose of illegal possession. This paper believes that the presumption can not completely solve this problem. The problems in the administration of justice are caused by the defects of legislation. Financial fraud is a criminal activity different from the traditional crime of fraud, and its harmfulness is not manifested through the purpose of illegal possession. The difficulty of proving the purpose of illegal possession is also different from that of the traditional crime of fraud. The blind expansion of the purpose of illegal possession in the crime of financial fraud not only causes the difficulty of the proof of litigation, but also leads to the excessive sentencing of the crime of financial fraud. The result was severe and lax punishment. After reviewing the legislation of financial fraud crime in various countries and fully analyzing the existing research results, this paper puts forward that the existing financial fraud crime should be replaced by financial fraud crime. Fraud is a concept derived from civil law. It is generally regarded as a civil tort. But under the market economy system, more and more fraudulent activities are punished as crimes, which is the decriminalization of fraud. Both fraud and fraud take false statements as the means. The difference lies in: the former does not have the purpose of illegal possession, the latter has the purpose of illegal possession; the former takes the illegal civil and administrative regulations as the premise and has the nature of administrative offense, the latter is a simple legal offence; the former is relatively simple in proving. The latter is more difficult to prove. In the financial field, the harm of misrepresentation is becoming more and more serious. All countries punish fraud in financial activities as a crime. The same is true in our country. However, the legislative mode of fraud crime is generally adopted by western countries. Subjectively, they do not require the purpose of illegal possession, and objectively they only require the act of false statement. However, the criminal law of our country has only adopted the legislative model of fraud crime in the field of securities, while the legislation mode of fraud crime has been adopted in the crime of fraud of financial institutions. This paper proposes to abolish the crime of financial fraud and replace it with the crime of financial fraud in order to reduce the difficulty of proof. And reduce their legal penalties. The first chapter analyzes the judicial dilemma of the financial fraud crime and the malpractice of the criminal judicial presumption, the second chapter deeply studies and demonstrates the legislative model of the financial fraud crime. The third chapter puts forward the preliminary conception of the possible legislative model modification in the future.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】