论非法占有目的不要说与利益盗窃的实质认定

On the Doctrine of Not Requiring the Purpose of Illegal Possession and Substantive Determination of Profit Theft

对于使用盗窃、盗窃欠条、勒赎盗窃等行为人所获利益和物本体价值不同的场合的定罪处罚,一直是理论与实务中的难题。目前的探讨大多从非法占有目的角度展开,形成了“综合说”“排除意思缓和说”“利用意思缓和说”的观点。但在我国的立法背景下,现有学说要么在理论上不自洽,要么在处理结论上会出现处罚漏洞或罪刑不均衡,究其原因,归根到底是因为没有完全摆脱德日盗窃罪构成要件框架的思维束缚。我国盗窃罪的对象包括财产性利益,(利益)盗窃罪的客观构成要件应当基于法益的要保护性和盗窃罪的本质进行实质化判断,该难题便可迎刃而解,无须诉诸主观构成要件。

For the use of theft,theft IOUs,blackmail theft and other occasions of the perpetrator of the benefit and the value of the object of different convictions and penalties,has been a difficult problem in theory and practice.Most of the current discussions have been carried out from the perspective of the purpose of illegal possession,forming the views of the"comprehensive theory",the exclusion of meaning mitigation theory,and the use of meaning mitigation theory.However,in the context of China’s legislation,the existing theories are either not self-consistent in theory,or in dealing with the conclusion that there will be loopholes in punishment or unbalanced punishment.In the final analysis,the reason is that we haven’t completely got rid of the frame of elements of theft in Germany and Japan.The object of theft in China includes property interests,and the objective elements of the crime of theft should be judged on the basis of the protection of legal interests and the essence of the crime of theft,so that the problem can be solved without resorting to the subjective elements.