论扒窃的认定

发布时间：2018-03-22 09:23

本文选题：盗窃罪　切入点：扒窃　出处：《内蒙古大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：2011年《刑法修正案(八)》将扒窃作为盗窃罪的新增罪状规定在刑法典中。但对什么是扒窃以及扒窃的构成要件等都未作出明确的规定,实属空白罪状。在司法实践中,对于扒窃到底怎么认定不同的人有不同的见解,若没有一个明确的认定标准就很容易造成一个尴尬的局面,即同案不同判,有时裁判结果甚至大相径庭。本文结合诸多学者对扒窃定义、构成要件要素等的研究,力求明确扒窃的内涵及边界；并立足于扒窃的立法沿革及入罪理由,对扒窃型盗窃罪在司法实践中的适用问题展开深入讨论,力求为扒窃的认定提供一条可行的路径。文章主要分为三部分。第一部分是对扒窃的立法沿革及入罪理由的探讨。该部分先从现有的刑事立法入手,分析了自1986年以来我国刑法及其相关的司法解释对扒窃的规定,结合当时的不同背景分析了扒窃入罪的理由,指出扒窃行为具有三性——严重的主观恶性、严重的社会危害性、财产权与公共秩序的双重侵害性。第二部分是对扒窃在理论上的争议与分歧的探讨。包括扒窃的概念、.扒窃与携带凶器的关系、扒窃应否限定在公共场所、扒窃是否要求具有秘密性、扒窃型盗窃罪是否存在未完成形态五个方面。扒窃是指以非法占有为目的,在公共场所秘密窃取他人随身携带的财物的行为。扒窃的认定不要求行为人携带凶器。不管是基于法律规范之间的相互衔接还是从司法实务的角度考虑,都应将盗窃罪中的扒窃限定在公共场所。扒窃应具有秘密性,即扒窃是乘人不觉而秘密取走他人财物,其手段以秘密为必要。关于扒窃型盗窃罪是否存在未完成形态的问题,本文持肯定观点。第三部分是对扒窃在司法实践中认定问题的探讨,包括扒窃成立盗窃罪的条件的认定、公共场所的认定、随身携带财物的认定以及扒窃出罪的认定四个方面。扒窃成立盗窃罪的条件有四：一是行为发生在公共场所；二是行为人所窃取的应是他人贴身携带的财物；三是行为人所窃取的财物体积相对较小；四是财物被窃取时必须正被他人控制支配。对公共场所的认定,应该把握好两个维度：一是空间,二是人群。关于空间维度,即公共场所应该是供人们进行生活、娱乐等公共活动的开放性空间。关于人群维度,首先应该满足空间维度,然后在这个空间内必须有人群,且应该至少有三人。对于随身携带财物的认定,本文支持物理接触说,即随身携带的财物应该是被害人放在身上或放置于其贴身的财物。另一方面,关于扒窃的出罪,应该从三个方面进行认定：一是把握好扒窃的出罪机制；二是扒窃的财物应该是具有一定价值,值得刑法保护；三是区分好扒窃罪与非罪的界限。
[Abstract]:The 2011 Criminal Law Amendment (8) stipulates pickpocketing as a new crime of theft in the Criminal Code. However, there are no clear provisions on what is pickpocketing and the constituent elements of pickpocketing, which is a blank crime. There are different views on how pickpockets can be identified as different people. Without a clear standard of identification, it is easy to create an awkward situation, that is, different judgments in the same case. Sometimes the result of judgment is even quite different. This paper, based on the research of many scholars on the definition and elements of pickpocketing, tries to clarify the connotation and boundary of pickpocketing, and based on the legislative evolution of pickpocketing and the reasons for incrimination. The application of pickpocketing theft in judicial practice is discussed in depth in order to provide a feasible way for the identification of pickpocketing. The article is mainly divided into three parts. The first part is to explore the legislative evolution of pickpocketing and the reasons for its incrimination. This part begins with the existing criminal legislation and analyzes the provisions of the criminal law and its related judicial interpretations on pickpocketing since 1986. Combining with the different backgrounds at that time, this paper analyzes the reasons for the crime of pickpocketing, and points out that pickpocketing is of three-serious subjective malignancy and serious social harmfulness. The second part is to discuss the theoretical disputes and differences of pickpocketing, including the concept of pickpocketing, the relationship between pickpocketing and carrying murder weapon, and whether pickpocketing should be limited to public places. Whether pickpocketing requires secrecy or not, whether there are five aspects of the crime of pickpocketing and whether there are unfinished forms. Pickpocketing refers to the purpose of illegal possession. The act of secretly stealing property carried by another person in a public place. The identification of pickpocketing does not require the perpetrator to carry the murder weapon. Whether based on the connection between legal norms or from the perspective of judicial practice, Pickpocketing should be restricted to public places. Pickpocketing should be secret, that is to say, pickpocketing is to take away other people's property without knowing it, and its means are necessary to keep secret. On the question of whether there is an incomplete form of pickpocketing theft, The third part is the discussion of the identification of pickpocketing in judicial practice, including the determination of the conditions for the establishment of the crime of theft by pickpocketing, the identification of public places, There are four conditions for the establishment of theft by pickpocketing: one is that the behavior occurs in public place, the other is that the person who steals is the property that other person carries closely. The third is that the property stolen by the perpetrator is relatively small, and the fourth is that the property must be controlled by others when it is stolen. Two dimensions should be grasped in the identification of public places: one is space, the other is crowd. That is, a public place should be an open space for people to live, entertain, and so on. With regard to the crowd dimension, it should first satisfy the spatial dimension, and then there must be a crowd in this space. And there should be at least three people. With regard to the identification of carry-on property, this article supports the physical contact saying that the property to be carried with you should be the property that the victim put on or placed on his body. On the other hand, with regard to the crime of pickpocketing, It should be determined from three aspects: first, grasp the crime mechanism of pickpocketing; second, pickpocketing property should have certain value, worthy of criminal law protection; third, distinguish between pickpocketing crime and non-crime boundaries.
【学位授予单位】：内蒙古大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】