非法获取他人盗窃财物行为之法律定性

发布时间：2018-04-24 21:46

本文选题：敲诈勒索罪 + 诈骗罪　；参考：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：盗窃罪、诈骗罪及敲诈勒索罪是司法实践中发案率较高的财产性犯罪，三个罪均为自然人犯罪，主观均为故意，且以非法占有为目的，均侵犯了公民或单位的公私财产权益。在客观方面，三个罪的危害行为分别表现为盗窃行为、诈骗行为及敲诈勒索行为。在司法实践中，典型的盗窃罪、诈骗罪及敲诈勒索罪是比较容易区分的，但在一些疑难复杂案件中，盗窃行为、诈骗行为与敲诈勒索行为往往纠结在一起，让人难以辨清其“真面目”。笔者以王某、马某侵财案引出相关理论问题，，深入比较了盗窃罪、诈骗罪以及敲诈勒索罪在犯罪构成要件上的本质区别，并着重分析恐吓行为与处分行为，力图厘清本案定性争议与疑难之处。本文分为四个部分：第一部分：基本案情介绍。由案由、案情简介、分歧意见、争议焦点四个部分构成。第二部分：相关问题的法理分析。对本案涉及的相关理论问题进行论述，重点对盗窃罪、诈骗罪与敲诈勒索罪犯罪构成客观要件的理解和认定进行研究，聚焦国内外学者的观点，并提出笔者自己的看法。第三部分：本案的结论。运用前文所述理论知识对本案展开分析，并结合相关法律规定，得出合理结论。第四部分：本案的研究启示。主要对此类型的案件的定性做总结归纳，以期望为司法实践中处理此类案件提供参考。
[Abstract]:Larceny, fraud and extortion are property crimes with high incidence in judicial practice. The three crimes are all natural persons' crimes, and the subjective crimes are all intentional, and for the purpose of illegal possession, they all violate the public and private property rights and interests of citizens or units. Objectively speaking, the three crimes of harm act are theft, fraud and extortion. In judicial practice, the typical crimes of theft, fraud and extortion are relatively easy to distinguish, but in some difficult and complex cases, theft, fraud and extortion are often entangled together. It is difficult to discern its true face. Based on the case of Wang Mou and Ma Mou, the author makes a deep comparison of the essential differences between the crime of larceny, fraud and extortion in the elements of crime, and emphatically analyzes the behavior of intimidation and punishment. Try to clarify the qualitative disputes and difficulties in this case. This paper is divided into four parts: Part I: introduction of the basic facts. It consists of four parts: the subject of the case, the brief of the case, the different opinions, and the focus of the dispute. The second part: the legal analysis of related problems. This paper discusses the relevant theoretical issues involved in this case, focuses on the understanding and identification of the objective elements of the crime of theft, fraud and extortion, focuses on the views of domestic and foreign scholars, and puts forward my own views. The third part: the conclusion of the case. Using the theoretical knowledge mentioned above, the author analyzes the case and draws a reasonable conclusion by combining the relevant laws and regulations. The fourth part: the research enlightenment of this case. This paper summarizes the nature of this type of cases in order to provide a reference for the judicial practice in dealing with such cases.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】