刑民关系视角下的诈骗罪研究

发布时间：2018-06-26 07:51

本文选题：刑民关系 + 诈骗行为　；参考：《西南政法大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：一般而言,刑事诈骗罪的研究集中于两个领域:一是刑法自身领域内就各构成要件进行分析;二是从形式规范上区分刑事诈骗与民事欺诈之间的差异,为司法实践提供法律适用准则。本文以刑法与民法之间的关系为逻辑起点,从本质上探寻刑事诈骗与民事欺诈之间的差异。同时,就诈骗罪整体而言,处分财产行为是处分人陷入认识错误的内心意思之外观表示,财产处分行为与处分人的认识错误统一于一个意思表示之中,实为表里关系。据此,笔者以民法意思表示为角度,对刑事诈骗罪的处分行为与错误认识进行了深入分析。另外,由于刑事诈骗罪乃财产犯罪,客观上要求具有财产损失,由此,笔者以财物的使用价值与支配价值为内容,构建了刑法财产损害的一般含义,并就特殊财产的损害认定进行了分析。论文共分为四个部分:第一部分是本论文的问题引出部分。笔者秉承问题意识,就刑事诈骗罪的研究现状进行了整理并提出了研究的问题所在。第二部分是本论文的研究难点。以现有的刑法与民法关系研究为基础,从调整对象与法律事实评价两方面,论证了刑法与民法之间的关系。刑法以公民个人基本权利与全体公民基本权利的对立紧张关系为调整对象,民法以平等公民之间的人身财产关系为调整对象。据此,刑法与民法在调整对象上存在本质差异,使得刑法与民法在对同一客观事实的法律评价上亦有所差异,这种差异即为刑事不法与民事不法之间的界限。第三、四部分是本论文的研究重点。根据刑法与民法调整对象上的差异,结合刑法人权保障机能,笔者认为刑事诈骗罪中的欺骗行为必须具有普遍侵害他人权利之属性,以求保障公民意思自治,限制国家公权力。具体到某一行为是否为刑事诈骗时,需要考察的是该欺骗行为所直接针对的事项是否涉及权利处分的普遍含义。该含义在交易上则为交易之典型特征,包括目的的考量及其他非专为个人利益设定的事项。另外,财产处分行为不应单独的研究是否需要处分意识,而应在与处分人认识错误相结合的前提下,置于意思表示概念中去理解。这样的理解才符合诈骗行为所能引起的处分人陷入认识错误进而处分财产的特征,使诈骗罪的各构成要件要素整合且不失逻辑性及周密性。需要注意的是,诈骗罪属于取得型财产犯罪,要求客观上的占有支配关系被打破,而这一支配关系的打破是否具有造成被害人财产损失的危害,关键在于财产对于被害人而言,其价值是否得以实现。由于刑法与民法在调整对象上的差异,使得刑法在评价被害人对财产的使用价值与交换价值的支配上,更加注重于被害人支配财产内容的一般性,对于其中具有特定性的因人而异的支配关系的破坏则放于民法调整。
[Abstract]:Generally speaking, the research on the crime of criminal fraud focuses on two fields: one is the analysis of the constituent elements in the field of criminal law itself, the other is to distinguish the difference between criminal fraud and civil fraud from the formal norms. To provide guidelines for the application of law in judicial practice. Taking the relationship between criminal law and civil law as the logical starting point, this paper explores the difference between criminal fraud and civil fraud in essence. At the same time, as far as the crime of fraud is concerned, the disposition of property is the appearance of the disposition person falling into the inner meaning of wrong understanding, and the property disposition behavior and the misunderstandings of the disposition person are United in the same expression of intention, which is in fact an apparent relationship. Based on this, the author makes a thorough analysis of the punishment and misunderstandings of the crime of criminal fraud from the point of view of the expression of intention in civil law. In addition, because the crime of criminal fraud is a crime of property, it requires property loss objectively. Therefore, the author constructs the general meaning of property damage in criminal law with the use value and dominating value of property as the content. At the same time, it analyzes the damage of special property. The thesis is divided into four parts: the first part is the introduction part of this paper. According to the problem consciousness, the author collates the present situation of the research on the crime of criminal fraud and puts forward the problem of the study. The second part is the research difficulty of this paper. Based on the existing research on the relationship between criminal law and civil law, this paper demonstrates the relationship between criminal law and civil law from two aspects: the object of adjustment and the evaluation of legal facts. The criminal law regards the antagonism between the basic rights of citizens and the basic rights of all citizens as the object of adjustment, while the civil law regards the relationship of personal property among equal citizens as the object of adjustment. Therefore, there are essential differences between criminal law and civil law in adjusting object, which makes criminal law and civil law have different legal evaluation of the same objective fact. This difference is the boundary between criminal lawlessness and civil malfeasance. The third and fourth parts are the focus of this paper. According to the difference between criminal law and civil law, combined with the function of human rights protection in criminal law, the author thinks that the deceptive behavior in the crime of criminal fraud must have the attribute of infringing the rights of others in order to guarantee the autonomy of citizens' will and limit the public power of the state. When a certain act is a criminal fraud, what needs to be examined is whether the matter directly targeted by the act involves the general meaning of the disposition of rights. It is a typical feature of the transaction, including purpose considerations and other matters not specifically designed for personal benefit. In addition, the behavior of property disposition should not be studied separately whether the disposition consciousness is needed or not, but should be understood in the concept of expression of will on the premise of combining it with the wrong understanding of the punishment person. This kind of understanding accords with the characteristics of the punishment which can be caused by the fraud and then disposes of the property, so that the elements of the crime of fraud are integrated, and the logic and thoroughness are not lost. It should be noted that the crime of fraud belongs to the crime of obtaining property, which requires that the objective relationship of possession and domination be broken, and whether the breaking of this dominant relationship has the harm of causing the victim's property loss, the key lies in the property for the victim. Whether its value can be realized. Because of the difference between criminal law and civil law in adjusting object, criminal law pays more attention to the general content of victim's controlling property in evaluating the use value and exchange value of victim's property. The destruction of the specific dominance relationship is placed in the adjustment of civil law.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D924.35;D923

【参考文献】