信用证欺诈与信用证诈骗关系之比较研究

A Comparative Study of L/C Scam and L/C Fraud

信用证欺诈与信用证诈骗之间并非逐项对应,两者在主客观两方面都存在差别,信用证欺诈行为可能构成伪造金融票证罪等犯罪;信用证诈骗罪隐含了"数额较大"的要求,对于一些客观行为上符合该罪构成要件的信用证欺诈行为,数额标准是信用证诈骗罪与信用证欺诈刑民区分的界限;受益人与开证申请人等串通骗开信用证的行为,必须具有非法占有项下资金的目的方能构成信用证诈骗罪;"软条款"本身并不为国际惯例和国内法律禁止,司法实践中对其效力也予以承认,因此设置"软条款"并不构成信用证欺诈或信用证诈骗的兜底情形。

L/C scam and L/C fraud do not correspondto each other item by item,with differences existing in both subjective and objective aspects. L/C fraud could constitute the crime of forging financial bills on other crimes,thus more often than not implying of ＂relatively large amount＂,which is usually regarded as a threshold for distinguishing criminal and civil crime in L/C frauds. In the cases where the beneficiary colludes with the applicant to fraudulently obtain the L/C,the attempt to illegally possessing the amount under the covering L/C is necessary to constitute the L/C fraud. Those ＂Soft clauses＂ are not prohibited by international practices or domestic laws,and their effects are also recognized in the judicial practice. Therefore,those ＂soft clauses＂ embedded in the L/C doesn＇t necessarily serveas miscellaneous provisions of L/C scam or L/C frauds.