我国公司行贿犯罪的法经济学研究

发布时间：2018-07-24 21:35

【摘要】：随着我国社会主义市场经济改革不断深化,在经济繁荣与经济活动更为活跃的背景下,公司行贿犯罪(笔者针对我国《刑法》中的三种罪名的合称)逐渐呈上升趋势。然而,关于公司行贿犯罪,在基础概念、基本理论和司法实践等方面,仍存在重大争议,如公司(国外所称“法人”、国内所称“单位”范畴内的一部分)在犯罪中的刑事责任依据,提高自然人自由刑是否为解决“重受贿、轻行贿”的刑罚失衡问题的最优方式,以及如何合理配置该类犯罪刑罚等。因此,本文运用法经济学,重新梳理公司行贿犯罪中的法人与自然人的刑事责任,分析行贿方与受贿方的深层关系与相互影响,从新的理论视角,构建公司行贿犯罪的刑罚配置方案。第一部分,本文运用法经济学原理重新审视公司行贿犯罪的刑事责任依据及其原因。首先根据企业所有权理论对公司行贿犯罪的犯罪肌理与激励问题进行分析,阐明在公司行贿犯罪中对公司进行惩罚的正当性(有责性)与判决阻断后对公司中自然人进行处罚的合理性。第二部分,根据法定刑与收集的真实案例对我国“重受贿、轻行贿”现状予以分析,并通过边际效用方法研究目前我国公司行贿犯罪的罚金刑配置问题,及公司行贿犯罪与受贿犯罪之间的内在关系。最后,根据供需理论说明在实际情形中刑罚无论施加于哪一方均会加重双方交易成本。第三部分,首先以理性犯罪模型为基础,建立符合公司行贿犯罪特征的理性行为模型,对我国司法实务中的案例进行研判,得出当前公司行贿犯罪刑罚威慑力不足与处断肆意的结论。最后依据报应刑决定刑罚上限,预防刑决定具体刑罚点的理论,提出应以违法所得而非行贿数额为主要考量因素合理配置公司罚金刑的方法。本文的研究意义在于不再亟于厘清公司犯罪的刑法理论聚讼,而以功利主义的法经济学方式对公司行贿犯罪的原因、刑事责任依据以及罚金刑等问题进行分析,得出具体而非抽象的规制对策,再通过研究结果反哺刑法理论并进行教义学的修正。本文的研究结论是针对公司行贿犯罪刑事责任依据的困境,与当前我国公司行贿犯罪威慑力不足与处断肆意的问题,重构公司行贿犯罪的罚金刑体系,从而达成公司行贿犯罪惩治威慑力最优的研究目的。申言之,根据对我国刑事案例中违法所得与行贿数额进行一元线性回归分析,构建符合我国公司行贿犯罪特征的理性行为模型,再依据报应刑决定刑罚上限,特殊预防决定具体刑罚的理论提出合理配置公司罚金刑的方法,将我国目前针对公司行贿犯罪的无限数额罚金标准改为限额罚金制,将违法所得作为罪状内容,取代行贿数额作为决定公司行贿犯罪罚金刑数额的依据,分为两种情况判处罚金刑:第一,审判时存在可供没收的违法所得;第二,审判时没有可供没收的违法所得。第一种情况又分为两种:一是全额违法所得可供没收,则判处少量罚金刑数额仅为消除公司再犯可能性即可;二是部分剩余违法所得可供没收,则以犯罪发生时该类犯罪惩罚概率判处差额罚金数额。第二种情况则以违法所得为罚金数额上限根据特殊预防必要性确定具体数额。就自然人刑罚而言,只有遭遇判决阻断时才具有判处自然人自由刑必要,除此之外应以消除自然人再犯可能性有限制条件地判处刑罚(没收因行贿犯罪获取的非法所得、判处适当罚金刑、资格刑并处以相关保安处分等)。
[Abstract]:With the deepening of China's socialist market economy reform and the more active economic prosperity and economic activity, the company's bribery crime (the author of the three crimes in the criminal law of China) has gradually increased. However, the crime of bribery in the company still exists in the basic concept, basic theory and judicial practice. Major disputes, such as the company (foreign name "legal person", the part of the domestic "unit") in the category of criminal responsibility in the crime, to improve the free punishment of natural persons is the best way to solve the problem of "heavy bribery, light bribery" and how to rationally configure the criminal penalty. Therefore, this article is used in this paper. Economics, recombing the criminal responsibility of the legal person and the natural person in the bribery crime of the company, analyzing the deep relationship and mutual influence between the bribe party and the bribe party, and constructing the penalty allocation scheme of the bribe crime from the new theoretical perspective. In the first part, this article uses the principle of law and economics to re examine the criminal responsibility of the bribe crime in the company. According to the reason and the reason. First, it analyzes the problem of the criminal texture and incentive of the company's bribery crime according to the theory of enterprise ownership, and clarifies the justifiability of punishing the company in the company's bribery crime and the rationality of punishing the natural person in the company after the judgment is blocked. The second part is based on the legal punishment and the truth of the collection. The case studies the current situation of "paying bribes heavily and taking bribes" in our country. Through the marginal utility method, we study the problem of the penalty allocation of the bribe crime of our company, and the internal relationship between the bribe crime and the bribery crime. Finally, according to the theory of supply and demand, it is shown which party will aggravate the double penalty in the actual situation. The third part, in the first part, based on the rational crime model, set up a rational behavior model which conforms to the characteristics of the bribery crime of the company, studies the cases in the judicial practice of our country, and draws the conclusion that the deterrent force of the criminal penalty is insufficient and the conclusion is disconnected. Finally, the penalty upper limit is determined on the basis of the retribution penalty, and the punishment will be prevented. The theory of specific penalty points is set up, and the method of rational allocation of fine penalty should be made by taking the illegal income rather than the amount of bribe as the main factor. The research significance of this paper is that it is no longer urgent to clarify the criminal law theory of the company, and the reasons for the crime of bribery by the utilitarianism and the law and economics, and the basis of the criminal responsibility. And the fine penalty and other issues to be analyzed, draw concrete and not abstract Regulation Countermeasures, and revise the theory of criminal law through the research results and revise the doctrine of teaching. The conclusion of this paper is the dilemma of the basis of the criminal responsibility of the bribe crime of the company, and the problem of the lack of deterrence and disconnection between the crime of bribery in our country and the reconfiguration of the public. The fine penalty system of bribery crime by the company, thus the purpose of the research on the optimal deterrence of the bribery crime by the Achieve Inc. In a word, according to the linear regression analysis of the illegal income and the amount of bribery in the criminal cases in China, a rational behavior model which conforms to the characteristics of the bribery crime in our country is constructed, and the penalty upper limit is determined according to the retribution penalty. In particular, the theory of specific penalty to determine the specific penalty is put forward to rationally configure the fine penalty of the company, and the unlimited fine standard of the company's current bribery crime is changed into the quota and penalty system, and the illegal income is taken as the content of the crime, and the amount of the bribe is replaced by the amount of the fine of the bribe of the company, which is divided into two cases. Penal punishment: first, there are illegal gains for confiscation in the trial; second, there is no illegal income for confiscation at trial. The first situation is divided into two types: first, the total amount of illegal income can be confiscated, and the amount of a small fine is only to eliminate the possibility of the company's repeated offense; and two is a part of the remaining illegal income for confiscation, then In the second case, the limit of the amount of the penalty amount is determined according to the necessity of special prevention. In terms of the penalty of natural persons, it is necessary for the natural person to be sentenced to freedom of punishment only when the sentence is blocked, except for the elimination of the second offense of natural persons. Penalty shall be imposed with limited possibilities (forfeiture of illegal gains obtained from bribery offences, appropriate fines, qualification penalties and related security measures, etc.).
【学位授予单位】：甘肃政法学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.3

【相似文献】