浅论侵占罪——精选推荐
内容摘要
rpg游戏制作大师>新年寄语2020侵占罪成为独立的罪名始于19世纪的德国法,在此之前侵占他人财产的以盗窃罪论处。我国1979年颁布的刑法典中没有规定侵占罪,在1997年《刑法》第270条才增设了侵占罪。由于侵占罪是新增设的罪名,有关侵占罪的研究尚很匮乏,然而在司法实践中却不断产生各种争议。为了加深对侵占罪的认识和理解,本文根据我国《刑法》的规定,结合中外刑法关于该罪的立法规定以及我国的司法实践,并借鉴国内外学者对本罪的研究成果,对侵占罪的理论及司法实践进行了一定的研究和探讨。
全文约26,000字,共分为四个部分:
第一部分:侵占罪的立法概述。该部分简要比较了我国侵占罪立法与大陆法系其他国家的不同。我国侵占罪的立法,从犯罪对象、犯罪行为、诉讼程序的限制三方面体现了刑法的谦抑性,但正是由于我国侵占罪的立法特鲜明,有独创性,因此带来了许多有争议的问题。
第二部分:侵占罪的犯罪构成。该部分对侵占罪的犯罪构成要件进行了研究和阐述:一、侵占罪的客体与对象,本文指出侵占罪的客体是公私财产所有权,指明侵占罪的对象是“他人财物”,“他人”包括自然人,也包括法人或其他组织。本文接着对3类侵占罪犯罪对象——代为保管的他人财物、遗忘物和埋藏物,进行了具体分析。特别对“代为保管”的含义做了扩大解释,并举例对不当得利和无因管理的财物进行了分析,认为它们均应作为“代为保管的他人财物”。本文还对被侵占财物能否为不动产、无形物和违
法物的情况进行了说明,指出不动产可以成为侵占罪的对象,但专利权、商标权和著作权等知识产权性的无形财产,不能成为侵占罪的对象,而赃物、违禁品和用于非法目的的财物应成为侵占罪的犯罪对象。
二、侵占罪的客观方面,本文从行为人必须是“非法占有他人财物”以及行为人所侵占的他人财物必须达到“数额较大”的程度这两个方面进行了分析和研究,对“拒不退还”和“拒不交出”的含义进行了解释,并且认为以法院立案的时间作为“拒不退还”和“拒不交出”的最后期限。三、侵占罪的主体,本文指出侵占罪的主体应是一般主体,单位不能成为侵占罪的主体。四、侵占罪的主观方面,本文指出侵占罪在主观方面表现为故意,并且必须有非法占有的目的。
第三部分:司法实务中的若干疑难问题处理。这是本文的重点部分,该部分中侵占罪与盗窃罪的区别又是本部分的重点,另外本文对职务侵占罪与侵占罪的区别以及侵占罪与罪的区别也进行了剖析和探讨:
一、侵占罪与盗窃罪的区别。这部分笔者着墨较多,因为笔者在本职工作中遇到许多相关案例,笔者想通过案例对侵占罪与盗窃罪的界限进行比较分析,以期做到对侵占罪与盗窃罪的有效区分。(一)笔者首先指出区别侵占罪与盗窃罪的关键是行为人在非法占有财物时,该财物究竟受谁的控制。如果行为人非法占有财物时,该财物本身就受行为人的合法占有控制,则该行为只可能构成侵占罪。如果
行为人非法占有财物时,该财物是受他人占有控制,行为人以秘密方式窃取,那么只能构成盗窃罪。(二)接着笔者通过对具体案例的分析,将几种特殊情况下侵占罪和盗窃罪的认定,进行了如下归纳和总结:1.财物虽然表面上处于行为人持有状态,但是根据客观上的实际情况可以判断,财物仍受物主的占有控制。此种情况下,如果行为人以非法占有为目的占有该财物,应定性为盗窃罪。2.侵占埋藏物与盗窃罪的区别。只有行为人无意间挖到埋藏物的情形下,进而非法占有,拒不交出的,才构成侵占罪。其它以非法占有为目的,采用秘密手段窃取埋藏物的,无论是有主埋藏物或无主埋藏物,均应定性为盗窃罪。3.关于无关的第三者从死者身上取得财物的行为如何定性?笔者认为应定性为盗窃罪,但不同意“死者占有说”的论述。因为我国《民法》规定:民事权利,始于出生,终于死亡,故死者不可能占有。但《继承法》规定:死者财产有继承人的归继承人所有,无继承人的归集体所有制组织所有或国家所有,行为人采取自以为不为物主(有继承人的,继承人为物主;无继承人的,集体组织或国家为物主)所知方式将死者财物拒为己有,应当构成盗窃罪。4.行为人受他人委托占有某种封装的包装物时,窃取封装内财物的行为属于盗窃还是侵占?笔者认为整个包装物及其内容物均由受托人持有,受托人侵占包装物整体或抽取部分内容物,均只构成侵占罪。
二、职务侵占罪与侵占罪的区别。笔者通过二者在犯罪对象、犯罪的客观表现形式,犯罪主体方面对两者进行区分,并列举了几个案例予以说明。
长沙有什么好玩的旅游景点三、侵占罪与罪的区别。笔者主要从“他人的财物向行为人控制之下转移的过程”加以区别。
第四部分:侵占罪的立法完善。该部分针对我国刑法关于侵占罪规定的不足,提出了相应的建议:一、笔者建议《刑法》270条第1款中“数额
较大”的标准应有明确规定。由于侵占罪所侵犯的对象范围较窄,其社会危害性较小,因此侵占罪的定罪数额应高于盗窃罪和职务侵占罪,笔者建议以人民币1万元至2.5万元作为定罪数额起点为宜。侵占罪的定罪数额应以客观占有的数额为标准,只要告诉人被侵占的财产合计达到数额较大,行为人拒不交出或归还即可构成侵占罪。二、笔者建议《刑法》270条第2款规定的侵占对象应包括遗失物。我国刑法学界对遗忘物和遗失物主要有两种观点: “区别说”和“统一说”。“区别说”是以民法学的研究为立论根据的。民法上认为二者的区别是,遗失人对财物的控制能力已经完全丧失,遗忘人对财物的控制能力并未完全丧失。“统一说”认为遗忘物包括遗失物,二者没有区别。笔者认为,遗忘物与遗失物在刑法上不作区分更为科学,侵占罪的犯罪对象应包括遗失物。因为“区别说”中两者的区分标准主观彩浓厚,不宜把握,容易造成司法上的混乱,故应将遗忘物与遗失物等而视之,从而减少认定犯罪的困难。笔者赞同侵占罪犯罪对象中应包含遗失物,取得遗失物并加以持有,拒不交出的,构成侵占罪,但并不主张扩大刑法对遗忘物和遗失物的干预。三、笔者认为《刑法》270条第3款中关于“告诉才处理”的规定存有不足。笔者建议“告诉才处理”应有例外规定,即侵占的对象为无主物或所有权归属不明之物,或侵占的财物数额巨大、情节恶劣等情况时,不适用“告诉才处理”的规定。
Abstract
In 19th century Germany was the first country to stipulate the embezzlement crime. Before this, people who invaded the public or private property was convicted of larceny. Our country, in 1979, did not stipulate the embezzlement crime in the criminal law. In 1997, when revised the criminal law, the legislature in view of the fact of our country's society development and the need, additionally built the embezzlement. Because embezzlement is a new crime, there are few researches and a lot of arguments on it. Therefore, this article is to discuss the controversial questions on embezzlement in order to progress the embezzlement both in theoretic and practical field.
降血脂的食物The paper is about 26,000 characters, altogether divides into four parts:
节假日值班制度
First part: Embezzlement legislation outline. This part summaries the legislation survey of embezzlement in China and overseas. Briefly analyses the conception of embezzlement in our country's criminal law.
Second part: constitution of Embezzlement. In this part, author firstly points out the object of embezzlement is “the property of other people” and “the other people” includes the natural person, the legal person and other organization. Secondly, the object of the embezzlement crime divides into the property of other people and the forgotten things, objects buried hereunder. In addition, author di
scusses the questions of "fairly great in amount" and "refusing to return" and approaches the time limits and the substantive content of “refusing to give back”. The author thinks that “before an expose of the offence” should be the standard of the time limits. In general, it is after the victim reports and at the time when People’s court put the case on file.
Third part: How to deal with the arguments of the embezzlement in justice practice. This part is the core of this article. In the part, through some typical cases, author analyses the differences between the
关于过年的歌曲embezzlement and other three crimes respectively. Firstly, author discusses the differences between the embezzlement and the larceny. And author thinks the key to distinguish them is who control the property lawfully before the property is occupied illegally. Secondly, author discusses the differences between the embezzlement and the official embezzlement in the criminal object, the criminal objective aspect and the criminal subjective aspect. Thirdly, this part discusses the differences between the embezzlement and the cheating crime.
Forth part: Suggestions to Perfect the Embezzlement Crime in Legislation. In this part, due to the defect in legislation about the embezzlement crime, the author proposes following three suggestions.
(1) In Criminal Law 270th 1st section, the standard of "large amount" are not well-defined. In the viewpoint of the author, "large amount" is very important condition of the embezzlement. Moreover, convictive amount of the embezzlement crime should be higher than that of the cheating and official the embezzlement crime. It should be from 10,000 to 25,000 Yuan. (2) In Criminal Law 270th 2nd section, the object of the embezzlement crime does not include the lost things. In the viewpoint of the author, the object of the embezzlement should include the lost things.
(3) The author has considered that the mode of complaint is too single in Criminal Law 270th 3rd section. Therefore, the Criminal Law of China should increase the mode of complaint of public prosecution.

版权声明:本站内容均来自互联网,仅供演示用,请勿用于商业和其他非法用途。如果侵犯了您的权益请与我们联系QQ:729038198,我们将在24小时内删除。