行贿罪中“不正当利益”的司法认定

发布时间：2018-07-21 09:27

【摘要】：行贿犯罪的准确打击要求司法工作者能够正确认定该罪的各个构成要件,但是行贿罪中“不正当利益”这一构成要件要素的理解认定在理论和实践中却存在较大争议。为此,笔者希望运用自己的法学知识,通过比较分析、案例分析等方法,对行贿罪中“不正当利益”的司法现状予以分析,尝试寻找“不正当利益”认定中存在混乱的原因,并对这一问题提出相应的解决思路。本文分为三个部分,共一万五千余字。第一部分为行贿罪“不正当利益”有关现状分析。首先对“不正当利益”相关法律规定历史沿革进行梳理,明确“不正当利益”认定的发展趋势以及出现的主要问题。其次对“不正当利益”司法认定中的现状和存在的问题进行分析,主要包括“不正当利益”认定存在偏差、充满模糊性以及司法实践中抽象处理认定过程等问题。第二部分为“不正当利益”认定存在混乱原因分析。首先很重要的原因是在于“不正当利益”的认定标准不统一,主要包括此构成要件要素自身属性的问题以及目前“手段不正当说”、“违反职务说”等多种观点的争议。其次在认定“不正当利益”时普遍未进行区分主动行贿和被动行贿。第三部分为提出解决这一问题的路径选择。首先“不正当利益”应当做扩大解释,但是也要保持一定程度的“谦抑性”。其次考虑到以往不区分情形认定的混乱局面、我国官场现状以及国外实践经验,对“不正当利益”的认定要区分主动行贿与被动行贿。主动行贿的认定采取“手段不正当说”,而被动行贿的认定要比照主动行贿,从有利于请托人的事项入手,采纳违规利益与职务违背的部分观点。最后就有关部分重要疑难问题的准确认定提出自己的解决思路。第一,区分主被动行贿要考虑是否为“钱权交易”,同时考虑在某一特定案件中的具体情况;第二,在入学、职务晋升等“不确定利益”谋取中,要明确手段行为与“不确定利益”的关联;第三,对日常送礼等“感情投资”如何认定的问题,则要综合考量、准确区分。
[Abstract]:The accurate strike of bribery crime requires the judicial workers to correctly identify the constituent elements of the crime, but the understanding of the element of "improper interests" in bribery crime is controversial in theory and practice. Therefore, the author hopes to use his own legal knowledge, through comparative analysis, case analysis and other methods, to analyze the judicial status quo of "improper interests" in the crime of bribery, and try to find out the cause of confusion in the identification of "improper interests". And put forward the corresponding solution to this problem. This article is divided into three parts, a total of more than 15000 words. The first part is the analysis of the present situation of bribery crime. Firstly, the historical evolution of the relevant legal provisions of "improper interests" is combed, and the development trend and main problems of the identification of "improper interests" are clarified. Secondly, this paper analyzes the current situation and existing problems in the judicial identification of "improper interests", including the bias of the identification of "improper interests", fuzziness and abstract processing of the cognizance process in judicial practice. The second part is the analysis of the cause of confusion in the identification of improper interests. The most important reason is that the standard of "improper interests" is not uniform, which mainly includes the problem of the attribute of the elements and the controversy of such viewpoints as "improper means" and "violation of duty theory" at present. Secondly, there is no distinction between active bribery and passive bribery. The third part is the path choice to solve this problem. First of all, the improper interests should be expanded, but the modesty should be maintained to a certain extent. Secondly, considering the chaotic situation that did not distinguish the situation in the past, the present situation of Chinese officialdom and the practical experience of foreign countries, it is necessary to distinguish between active and passive bribery in the identification of "improper interests". The cognizance of active bribery adopts "improper means", while that of passive bribery should be compared with active bribery, starting with the matters in favor of asking clients, and adopting some viewpoints of illegal interests and breach of duty. Finally, the author puts forward his own solution to some important problems. First, to distinguish between active and passive bribery, we should consider whether it is a "money right transaction" and consider the specific circumstances in a particular case; second, in seeking "uncertain benefits" such as admission, promotion, etc. It is necessary to make clear the relationship between the behavior of means and the "uncertain interests"; third, to determine how to identify the "emotional investment" such as daily gift giving, we should consider comprehensively and distinguish accurately.
【学位授予单位】：山西大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.392

【参考文献】