“杀猪盘”犯罪案件的定性与处罚——同案不同判引发的思考

Qualitative and Punishment of the Criminal Case of“Killing Pigs”:Thoughts from Different Sentences in the Same Case

“杀猪盘”案件是近年较为流行的新型电信诈骗犯罪。对于“杀猪盘”案件的定性和处罚,司法实务中存在同案不同判的现象。原因在于,司法机关极少细致地研究“杀猪盘”案件的行为特征,未能准确把握诈骗罪的行为构造,也忽略了开设赌场罪的保护法益,最为关键的是没有充分评价案件的不法事实,最终导致案件的处理结论有失偏颇。“杀猪盘”案件存在两个性质完全不同的行为一是建立赌博网站并接受投注,成立开设赌场罪;二是通过操纵赌博结果骗取财物,成立诈骗罪。行为人先后针对不同的法益实施了两个内容完全不同的行为,因而不可能构成想像竞合犯;由于前后两行为欠缺类型关联性,所以也不属于牵连犯。为了充分评价案件的不法事实,避免量刑失衡,对“杀猪盘”案件应当以开设赌场罪与诈骗罪进行数罪并罚。

The crime of“killing pigs”is a new type of telecommunication fraud crime that is more popular in recent years.For the characterization and punishment of the crime of“killing pigs”,there is a phenomenon of different judgments in the same case in judicial practice.The reason is that the judiciary rarely studies the behavioral characteristics of the crime of“killing pigs”in detail,fails to accurately grasp the behavioral structure of the crime of fraud,and ignores the legal benefits of the crime of opening a casino.The most important thing is that the case is not fully evaluated.The unlawful facts eventually led to a biased conclusion of the case.There are two behaviors of completely different nature in the crime of“killing pigs”:the first is the behavior of establishing a gambling website and accepting betting,which is the crime of opening a casino,and the second is the crime of defrauding property by manipulating the results of gambling,which is the crime of fraud.The perpetrator has performed two acts with completely different content for different legal interests,so it is impossible to constitute an imaginary joint offense;because the two acts before and after lack of type relevance,they are not implicate offender.To fully evaluate the illegal facts of the case and avoid imbalance in sentencing,the crime of“killing pigs”should be punished by the crime of opening a casino and the crime of fraud.