“许霆案”的刑法解释学思考

On "Xuting Case" from the Perspective of Criminal Law Hermeneutic

根据我国刑法第264条的规定,许霆以非法占有为目的,利用有故障的ATM机恶意支取银行现金175000元的行为构成盗窃罪,而不是侵占罪和诈骗罪。ATM机不是"金融机构",但"盗窃ATM机内的资金"仍然属于"盗窃金融机构的经营资金"。"许霆案"引发三点反思:第一,该案折射出我国现行刑法司法解释体制的弊端,所以应当建立以法官解释法律为基础、以最高法院的统一解释为辅的新的司法解释体制;第二,法官应当善于运用各种刑法解释方法;第三,法官在刑法解释中应当适当考虑舆论民情,前提是该舆情的表达遵循了客观真实原则。

According to the article 264 of the criminal law of the PRC, Xuting took advantage of the trouble ATM and occupied the bank＇s money RMB175000 unlawfully, which is larceny, not the crime of embezzling and fraud. The ATM set is not a financial organization, but stealing money through the ATM can be regarded as stealing money from the financial organization. The case deduces three points ： firstly, the case shows the malpractice of the current system of our criminal judicial interpretation, so we should set up a new system taking the judge＇s interpretation as a base and the supreme court＇s united interpretation as assistance; secondly, judge should be good at all sort of methods of interpreting criminal law; finally, judge should consider the masses＇ opinion properly on the premise that the representation of the public opinion must adhere to the principle of objectivity and reality .