非法经营罪司法认定问题研究

发布时间：2018-06-18 02:34

本文选题：非法经营 + 违反国家规定　；参考：《沈阳师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：在刑法中,非法经营罪处于至关重要之地位,非法经营的行为屡见不鲜,并且日新月异。我国刑法第二百二十五条用空白罪状描述了非法经营罪,为本罪构建了基本结构,但是本条规定也留下了第四款兜底性条款,司法解释和司法实践都对本罪有了不同程度的扩张,使得本罪扩张适用现象频发。一些新型行为的入罪与出罪引发颇多争议。以我国目前的相关法律和司法解释认定这些行为时,存在着解读适用方面的争议,理论上对于这些行为的认定也莫衷一是,这也使我国实务界对非法经营罪的认定难上加难。故而,对于上述行为进行研究认定很有必要。笔者以真实的案例为引,通过对四个不同角度案例的入罪、出罪的定性探讨,为更好地认定非法经营罪抛砖引玉。同时,笔者在论文的写作中力求将说理与适用结合,以期得到更加具有实用意义的结论。本文以四个案例为切入点,对一些与本罪有关的争议予以讨论研究:由苏某甲非法建售农村公墓案引出非法经营罪法益、犯罪对象的争议,将围绕本罪法益的三种主要学说作对比分析,得出法益为市场准入秩序的结论,由法益再对本罪的犯罪对象予以认定,即限制买卖物品。墓穴并非限制买卖物品,建售农村公墓行为不可以本罪来评价;再以许某买卖非国家重点保护野生动物案引出本罪前提要件,即“违反国家规定”的相关争议,对理论与实践中对于国家规定的不同解读予以解析,得出自己的结论,将许某行为评价为非法经营罪;接着用张某网售弹药制造工具案引出本罪的行为要件,即“非法经营行为”的相关争议,对“非法”与“经营”的认定难点予以辨析,将张某行为排除在本罪之外;最后用远峡船舶公司擅自经营水上补油业务案引出本罪的程度要件,即“扰乱市场秩序,情节严重”的相关争议,对程度要件的范围加以界定,最后得出远峡船舶公司不构成犯罪的结论。
[Abstract]:In criminal law, the crime of illegal operation is very important. Article 225 of our criminal law describes the crime of illegal business with blank crime, which constructs the basic structure for this crime, but this article also leaves the fourth clause of "bottom". Both judicial interpretation and judicial practice have expanded the crime to different degrees, which makes the crime expand frequently. The incrimination and exoneration of some new acts have caused much controversy. There are disputes on interpretation and application of these acts in the current legal and judicial interpretations of our country, and there is also a lack of agreement on the identification of these acts in theory, which makes it more difficult for the practical circles of our country to identify the crime of illegal operation. Therefore, it is necessary to study and identify the above-mentioned behaviors. The author takes the real case as the citation, through the four different angle cases' incrimination, the qualitative discussion of the crime, in order to better identify the illegal operation crime. At the same time, the author tries to combine reasoning with application in order to get more practical conclusions. This paper takes four cases as the starting point to discuss and study some disputes related to this crime: the case of illegal construction and sale of rural cemeteries by Su Mou Jia leads to the legal benefits of illegal operation and the dispute of the object of the crime. By comparing and analyzing the three main theories of the legal interest of this crime, the conclusion that the legal interest is the order of market access is drawn, and the object of the crime is identified by the legal interest, that is, the restriction of the purchase and sale of goods. The grave is not a restriction on the sale and purchase of articles, and the construction and sale of rural cemeteries cannot be evaluated by this crime; and then the case of Xu for buying and selling non-state key protected wild animals leads to the premise of this crime, that is, the related dispute about "violating the state regulations." This paper analyzes the different interpretations of the national regulations in theory and practice, draws its own conclusion, evaluates Xu's behavior as the crime of illegal operation, and then uses Zhang's case of selling ammunition manufacturing tools on the net to elicit the behavioral elements of this crime. Namely "illegal business behavior" related disputes, "illegal" and "management" of the identification of difficulties to be differentiated, the behavior of Zhang excluded from this crime; Finally, using the case of Yuanxia Shipping Company to operate the oil replenishment business on water without authorization, it leads to the degree elements of this crime, that is, the related dispute of "disturbing the market order, the circumstances are serious", and defines the scope of the degree elements. Finally, the conclusion that Yuanxia shipping company does not constitute a crime.
【学位授予单位】：沈阳师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.33

【参考文献】