骗取贷款罪中"重大损失"的体系定位、实务考察与标准重塑

System Orientation,Practice Inspection and Standard Reshaping of"Significant Losses"in the Crime of Defrauding Loans

此次《刑法修正案(十一)》将骗取贷款罪中的"其他严重情节"删除,"重大损失"便成为该罪亟须厘清的个罪要素.由于客观处罚条件说、情节要素说均存在缺陷,应将"重大损失"的体系定位归属于构成要件结果要素,这既符合我国的处罚模式,也与当前刑法规定和该罪的保护法益相匹配.不管是《刑法修正案(十一)》生效前,抑或是《刑法修正案(十一)》出台后,忽视"重大损失"的体系定位、未结合保护法益认定"重大损失""重大损失"时间节点认定存在偏差是司法实务的困境所在.应严格遵循《追诉标准(二)》第22条的规定,避免将数额论作为认定该罪的条件.同时,应结合信贷资金安全这一保护法益的认定层次具体规范适用"重大损失".

The"Criminal Law Amendment(Eleven)"deleted the"serious circumstances"in the crime of defrauding loans,and"major loss"has become an element of the crime that needs to be clarified urgently.Due to the flaws in the theory of objective punishment conditions and the theory of circumstance elements,the system positioning of"major loss"should be attributed to the elements of the constituent elements and results.This is not only in line with my country's criminal punishment model,but also in line with the current criminal law and the protection of the crime's legal interests.Whether it was before the 11th Amendment to the Criminal Law came into effect,or after the 11th Amendment to the Criminal Law was promulgated,the systematic positioning of"significant losses"was ignored,the determination of"significant losses"and the timing of"significant losses"were not combined with the protection of legal interests.The existence of deviation is the dilemma of judicial practice.The first item of Article 22 of the"Prosecution Standards(2)"should be strictly followed the legal provisions in order to regulate the application of"significant losses".At the same time,"significant losses"should be specifically regulated in conjunction with the safety of credit funds,which is the identification level for protecting legal interests.