侵占罪与不当得利的交叉难题及界分标准研究

发布时间：2018-08-13 21:14

【摘要】：侵占罪是我国财产犯罪中的常见罪名之一，自1997年刑法增设以来已经有了17年的历史。由于社会经济现象的多元化以及经济行为的纷繁复杂，司法实践中刑民交叉难题与日俱增，，在财产犯罪中，侵占罪与不当得利的交叉便是刑民交叉的突出表现。侵占罪的特征之一就是，行为人的犯罪对象是自己已经占有的他人财物，而这一特征与不当得利的某些情形极为相似，这是导致侵占罪与不当得利难以区分的原因。在学术界，不当得利情形下能否成立侵占罪是一个存在诸多争议的问题。本文试图从司法实践中的侵占罪与不当得利交叉案件入手，找出二者交叉的范围与具体界分标准，力求得出能对司法实践有帮助的结论。除了引言，本文包括4部分，约31000字：第一部分提出了侵占罪与不当得利交叉问题。本部分以司法实践中的某些案件为切入点，引出了司法实践中确实存在对侵占罪与不当得利交叉案件的不同处理意见。进而提出了学术界对侵占罪与不当得利关系的争论，在此，笔者通过对否定说观点的质疑，表明了自己的立场：侵占罪与不当得利确实存在交叉。第二部分分析了侵占罪与不当得利交叉的原因。在本部分中，笔者主要讨论两个问题：（一）分别从概念、立法目的、构成要件等方面对不当得利与侵占罪进行了阐述，厘清了不当得利的基本类型，以及侵占罪变“占有”为“不法所有”的本质特征。然后，又从代为保管的他人财物、遗忘物埋藏物、不当得利与侵权行为的交叉这三个角度出发，对侵占罪与不当得利交叉的原因进行了分析。（二）对侵占罪与不当得利交叉的实质——刑民法律关系交叉进行了讨论，总结出了三个引起刑民交叉的原因，即刑民法规竞合、行为竞合以及法律责任聚合。第三部分探讨了侵占罪与不当得利交叉的具体情形。笔者从给付型不当得利与非给付型不当得利这一不当得利的基本分类出发，结合案例的形式，整理出了侵占罪与不当得利交叉的具体情形。笔者在此部分中也对遗失物与遗忘物、不法原因给付物与不法原因委托物等概念进行了分析和解释。第四部分尝试提出侵占罪与不当得利的界分标准。笔者认为，在特定情况下的不当得利可以转化为侵占罪，二者的界分标准应当从侵占罪的构成要件中寻找答案。笔者认为，在主观上，不当得利受益人不存在故意，即使产生了某种恶意，也仅是一种想要暂时排除其他人对财物的使用或者占有的目的；而侵占罪行为人主观上是直接故意，具有非法占有目的。从客观角度分析，不当得利向侵占罪的转化分为两步：首先，不当得利受益人最终取得利益的方式不具有违法性，但如果受益人实施了处分或者藏匿等侵权行为，其行为就具备了民事违法性；第二，如果受益人在实施侵权行为之后，拒不退还或交出自己占有的财物，那么其行为的性质就由民事违法上升到了应受刑罚处罚的程度，实现了向侵占罪的完全转化。
[Abstract]:The crime of embezzlement is one of the common crimes in property crimes in our country, which has a history of 17 years since the criminal law was added in 1997. Due to the diversification of social and economic phenomena and the complexity of economic behavior, the problem of cross-cutting between criminal and civil in judicial practice is increasing day by day. One of the characteristics of the crime of embezzlement is that the object of the offender's crime is other people's property already occupied by himself, which is very similar to some cases of unjust enrichment. This is the reason why it is difficult to distinguish between the crime of embezzlement and unjust enrichment. This paper tries to find out the scope and specific criteria of the intersection of the crime of embezzlement and unjust enrichment from the cross-case of the crime of misappropriation and unjust enrichment in judicial practice.
In addition to the introduction, this article consists of 4 parts, about 31000 words:
The first part puts forward the problem of the intersection of the crime of embezzlement and the unjust enrichment.This part takes some cases in judicial practice as the breakthrough point,leads to different opinions on the intersection of the crime of embezzlement and the unjust enrichment in judicial practice,and then puts forward the controversy on the relationship between the crime of embezzlement and the unjust enrichment in academic circles. The questioning of negation points out his position: there is a cross between embezzlement and unjust enrichment.
The second part analyzes the reasons for the overlap between the crime of misappropriation and the crime of unjust enrichment. In this part, the author mainly discusses two issues: (1) expounds the crime of unjust enrichment and the crime of misappropriation from the concepts, legislative purposes, constitutive requirements and other aspects, clarifies the basic types of unjust enrichment, and the crime of misappropriation "possession" as "illegal possession". Secondly, the author analyzes the reasons of the overlap between the crime of embezzlement and the unjust enrichment from the three angles of the other person's property in custody, the buried property of the forgotten property, the overlap between the unjust enrichment and the infringement. (2) The author discusses the essence of the overlap between the crime of embezzlement and the unjust enrichment - the relationship between the criminal law and the civil law. The reasons for the intersection of criminal and civilian are the concurrence of criminal laws and regulations, the concurrence of actions and the aggregation of legal liability.
The third part discusses the specific situation of the overlap between the crime of embezzlement and the unjust enrichment. The author starts from the basic classification of the unjust enrichment of the type of payment and the type of non-payment, and combines the form of the case to sort out the specific situation of the overlap between the crime of embezzlement and the unjust enrichment. The concept of the cause and the illegal cause, the entrustment and so on are analyzed and explained.
The fourth part tries to put forward the demarcation standard between the crime of misappropriation and the unjust enrichment.The author thinks that under certain circumstances the unjust enrichment can be transformed into the crime of misappropriation. From an objective point of view, the transformation from unjust enrichment to the crime of embezzlement can be divided into two steps: first, the way in which the beneficiary of unjust enrichment ultimately gains benefits is not illegal, but If the beneficiary carries out such torts as punishment or concealment, his act will have civil illegality; secondly, if the beneficiary refuses to return or hand over the property in his possession after the implementation of the tort, the nature of his act will rise from civil illegality to the degree of punishment, and the crime of embezzlement will be completed. Full transformation.
【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;D923

【参考文献】