盗窃罪客观方面行为方式新解读

发布时间：2018-09-12 21:23

【摘要】：盗窃罪是一种古老的侵财型犯罪，因其具有较重的社会危害性，长期以来一直倍受国内外刑法学界的密切关注。与此同时，盗窃罪的行为方式往往极其复杂并具有变化性,随着我国社会经济的迅猛发展和国民社会生活日益呈现的复杂多样性,盗窃罪在立法和实践等诸多方面也因落后于社会而日益显露出一些缺陷和不足。正因为如此，我国理论界才产生了众多围绕盗窃罪的主体范围、刑事责任年龄、犯罪对象范围、行为方式认定、法定刑设置等方面问题的争议。作为一种对日常生活有着广泛影响的犯罪,盗窃罪理应得到相关立法完善以适应新的社会形势和经济发展状况。本文仅试图对盗窃罪客观方面的行为方式进行分析,笔者认为除了秘密窃取行为方式以外,公然盗窃也应该认定为盗窃罪客观行为方式之一。由于目前在我国处于通说地位的是主张盗窃罪客观方面必须是财物所有人以不易觉察的秘密手段获得财物为必要前提，秘密乃是盗窃罪的应有之意，且这种观点也是我国刑法分则中关于盗窃罪犯罪构成要件的立法之意，这就为竭力提倡公然窃取行为也应认定为盗窃罪的主张增大了难度和建立了重重障碍。本文通过与外国刑事立法中有关盗窃罪客观方面秘密性与公然性的争议性规定进行比较与研究，尖锐的指出将盗窃罪客观方面仅限于秘密窃取的局限性，进而建设性的提出了将公然盗窃引入盗窃罪的设想。本文共由四部分组成，文章的第一部分为引言，概括论述了文章所研究议题的研究现状、研究意义、研究方法以及本文可能的创新点等。本文的第二部分对我国目前处于通说地位的观点即盗窃罪的客观行为方式仅限于秘密窃取这一观点进行解读，主要从盗窃罪行为方式的本质即排除他人对财物的支配、建立新的财物控制关系、受害人未作出处分财产的行为、不具备“暴力、胁迫性”；盗窃罪“秘密”和“窃取”行为的定性以及秘密窃取行为的特征即行为主体的主观性、行为对象的相对性、行为时间的限定性等方面进行分析，为下一部分得出通说观点的缺陷和理论争议打下基础。文章第三部分详细阐述了传统通说将盗窃罪的客观构成要件行为方式仅限于秘密窃取这一观点在理论和实践上的缺陷和不足，理论上的缺陷主要表现传统通说的认定使得盗窃罪主客观要件的相互矛盾，实践方面的缺陷多体现在通说观点将导致侵财型案件在司法实践中的定罪模糊等。文章的最后一部分首先在目前国内外对盗窃罪客观方面构成要件行为方式的定性争议的观点主张进行了分类汇总，我国国内以“秘密窃取”说为通说观点，而国外理论界则以将“公然窃取”说的引入为通说观点，并在其后明确了本文笔者所支持的观点。此部分的第二小节大胆提出将以“平和手段公然窃取”行为引入盗窃罪客观行为方式的创造性建议，并指出将公然窃取引入盗窃罪具有其理论上和实践上的合理之处，，这一举措更加贴合了国外有关盗窃罪行为方式的通说规定，并有利于财产型犯罪定罪标准的明确化，更大大弥补了通说中主客观要件矛盾性这一不足。文章的最后对以平和手段公然窃取行为的外在表现形式进行了详细的解读。
[Abstract]:Larceny is an ancient crime of infringing on property, which has been paid close attention by the criminal law circles both at home and abroad for a long time because of its great social harmfulness. Meanwhile, the behavior of larceny is often extremely complex and changeable, with the rapid development of social economy and the increasingly complex life of the national society. As a result, there are many disputes about the scope of the subject of larceny, the age of criminal responsibility, the scope of the object of crime, the determination of the mode of conduct, the setting of legal penalty and so on. Crimes that have a broad impact on daily life should be perfected by relevant legislation to adapt to the new social situation and economic development.
This article only attempts to analyze the objective aspects of the crime of larceny, the author believes that in addition to the secret theft, blatant theft should also be recognized as one of the objective behavior of larceny. Secret means to obtain property is a necessary prerequisite, secrecy is the proper meaning of larceny, and this view is also the legislative meaning of the constituent elements of larceny in the specific provisions of the Criminal Law of China, which makes it more difficult and obstacles to advocate that blatant larceny should also be recognized as larceny. By comparing and researching the controversial provisions concerning the objectivity of larceny, the author points out sharply that the objective aspect of larceny is limited to the limitation of secret larceny, and then constructively puts forward the idea of introducing open larceny into larceny.
This paper consists of four parts, the first part of the article is the introduction, which summarizes the research status, significance, research methods and possible innovations of this paper.
The second part of this article interprets the general view that the objective behavior of larceny is confined to secret theft, mainly from the nature of larceny, that is, to exclude other people's domination of property, to establish a new relationship of property control, the victim has not made the act of disposing of property, and does not possess " Violence, coercion, the characterization of theft "secret" and "theft" and the characteristics of secret theft, i.e. the subjectivity of the subject, the relativity of the object and the limitation of the time of the act, are analyzed in order to lay the foundation for the next part to draw a general view of the defects and theoretical controversy.
The third part of the article elaborates the defects and deficiencies in theory and practice of the traditional theory that the objective constituent elements of larceny are confined to secret theft. The viewpoint will lead to the conviction of the invading financial cases in judicial practice.
The last part of the article firstly classifies and summarizes the opinions on the qualitative controversy of the objective aspects of the constitutive elements of larceny both at home and abroad. In China, the theory of "secret theft" is the general view, while in foreign theoretical circles, the theory of "open theft" is introduced as the general view, and after that this article is clear. The second section of this part boldly puts forward the creative suggestion of introducing "blatant theft by peaceful means" into the objective behavior of larceny, and points out that the introduction of blatant theft into larceny is reasonable in theory and practice, which is more suitable for the larceny abroad. The general provisions of the mode are conducive to the clarification of the conviction criteria of property-type crimes and make up for the contradiction of subjective and objective elements in the general theory.
【学位授予单位】：河北经贸大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.35

【参考文献】