集资诈骗罪与民间借贷界限问题研究

发布时间：2018-07-31 13:20

【摘要】：民间借贷对正规金融起到了不可或缺的补充作用，为中国经济增长作出了巨大贡献，但是每年却有很多民间融资行为转化为集资诈骗犯罪，非法集资层出不穷。目前我国刑法理论界和实务界对民间借贷行为和集资诈骗罪之间界限的研究指出：应从主观上是否具有非法占有的目的、客观上是否针对社会大众使用诈骗方法、承诺的利息差别等角度进行分析，这些研究为有效区分二者提供了良好思路，但需要进一步梳理和细化；关于“非法占有目的”、“社会大众”、“诈骗方法”的认定标准散见于有关集资诈骗罪的论述中，且观点不一、难以把握，需要进一步深入研究。笔者在对已有文献进行梳理总结的基础上展开对民间借贷与集资诈骗罪两者界限的研究，以期深化对该问题的研究和认识，对理论和实务中有效划清这两者的界限有所助益。全文三万二千字，分为三个部分：第一部分：集资诈骗罪概述。在这部分里，首先阐释集资诈骗罪的概念和发案特点。在此基础上，进一步分析学界对本罪的主客观构成要件的不同看法，提出自己的观点，尤其对非法占有目的的认定进行了详细论述。第二部分：民间借贷概述。在梳理学界对民间借贷各种定义的基础上，首先对民间借贷的含义进行了概括和阐述。接着介绍了民间借贷的历史、分析其存在的合理性。最后指出民间借贷虽对我国经济作出巨大贡献却长期处于“不法”状态的现实，提倡实行民间借贷法制化。第三部分：集资诈骗罪与民间借贷的界限。此为本文的重点研究部分，分两个步骤对集资诈骗罪和民间借贷之间的界限进行研究。第一步，要看某一民间借贷行为是否在主观上具有非法占有的目的，具有此目的的构成集资诈骗罪，不具有的仅为一般的民间借贷纠纷。通过分析非法占有目的的内涵、理论和实务界给出的判定标准，进而结合具体的案例来阐释笔者提炼的标准，即对于非法占有目的的认定应分别从主观心理状态和客观表现两方面入手，坚持主客观统一的原则，全面、细致地分析整个案情，从行为人的主观陈述、经济状况、筹集资金的方法、目的及用途、履行集资合同的诚意、筹得资金后的使用方式、案发前后是否具有归还能力和违约后的态度等一系列主客观表现，对行为人是否具有非法占有目的进行认定。另外，笔者还提出了在判定是否存在该目的时的注意事项。第二步，要看集资对象是否为社会公众、是否使用了诈骗的手段进行非法集资。对于“社会公众”的理解，学界存在“不特定的多数人”和“不特定或者多数人”两种理解，，笔者赞成后一种理解。然后对亲友和单位内部人员能否构成集资的对象、“公众”在数量上的标准及学界对社会公众的五种判断标准进行阐述，并结合“浙江吴英案”论述了自己的观点。紧接着阐述“使用诈骗方法”的含义、方法和对其应有的理解。之后分析“非法集资”的定义、手段、分类、法律依据、特征和具体的判断方法。第四部分：区分二者界限的观念指引。在这部分里指出了在民间借贷和集资诈骗罪的区分过程中要注意的三个问题：一是干涉经济生活，刑法要遵守“不得已”原则；二是除了对那些情节恶劣、不具有私法救济可能性的借款者可直接认定为犯罪外，应坚持“先民后刑”的处理方式；三是要对民间借贷加以规范引导。
[Abstract]:Private lending has played an indispensable complementary role to the formal finance and made great contributions to the economic growth of China. However, many folk financing actions have been transformed into fund-raising fraud and illegal fund-raising every year. It is pointed out that whether the objective of illegal possession is subjective, whether the methods of fraud and the difference of interest between the masses are objectively analyzed, these studies provide a good idea for the effective distinction between the two, but need to be further combed and refined; on the "purpose of illegal possession", "the public", The identification standard of the method of fraud is scattered in the discussion about the crime of fund raising fraud, and it is difficult to grasp and need further study. On the basis of summarizing the existing literature, the author studies the boundary between the civil loan and the crime of collecting capital fraud, with a view to deepening the research and understanding of the problem. It is helpful to draw a clear line between them in practice.
The full text is divided into thirty-two thousand characters, which are divided into three parts.
The first part is an overview of the crime of fund-raising fraud. In this part, the concept of the crime of fund-raising fraud and the characteristics of the crime are explained. On this basis, the different views on the subjective and objective constitutive requirements of the crime are further analyzed, and the views are put forward, especially the identification of the purpose of illegal possession.
The second part: an overview of private lending. On the basis of combing the various definitions of private lending in the academic circles, the meaning of folk lending is summarized and expounded. Then, the history of private lending is introduced and the rationality of its existence is analyzed. Finally, it is pointed out that although the private lending has made a great contribution to the economy of our country, it has long been in the "unlawful" form. The reality of the state, advocating the implementation of the legal system of private lending.
The third part: the boundary between the crime of fund-raising fraud and the private lending. This is the key part of this article. It is divided into two steps to study the boundary between the crime of fund-raising fraud and the private lending. Some are only common folk lending disputes. Through the analysis of the connotation of the purpose of illegal possession, the criteria given by the theoretical and practical circles, and then a specific case to explain the standard of the author, that is, the identification of the purpose of illegal possession should start with two aspects of subjective psychological state and objective expression, and insist on the unity of subjective and objective views. The principle, comprehensive and meticulous analysis of the whole case, from the subjective statement of the actor, the economic situation, the means of raising funds, the purpose and use, the sincerity of the fund collecting contract, the way to use the funds after the fund, the ability to return the case before and after the crime and the attitude after the breach of contract and so on, whether it has illegal occupation of the perpetrator. The second step is to see whether the fund is the public and whether the means of fraud are used to collect funds illegally. For the understanding of the public, there are "unspecific majority" and "unspecific or most people" in the academic community. "The two understanding, I agree with the latter kind of understanding, and then on whether the relatives and members of the internal personnel can form a capital collection," the public "in the number of standards and the academic community to the public five criteria for the judgment, and combined with the" Zhejiang Wu Ying case "to discuss his own views. Then it analyzes the definition, means, classification, legal basis, characteristics and specific judgment methods of "illegal fund-raising".
The fourth part: the concept of the distinction between the two parties. In this section, it points out the three issues to be paid attention to in the process of distinguishing private lending and fund fraud: one is to interfere in economic life, and the criminal law should abide by the principle of "no already"; two is that the borrower, in addition to the abominable circumstances, does not have the possibility of private law relief. If we regard it as a crime, we should adhere to the way of dealing with "the former and the latter." three, we should standardize and guide private lending.
【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】：D924.33

【参考文献】