诈骗罪中的处分意识:必要性及判别

Disposition Consciousness in Fraud:Necessity and Contents

处分意识不要说无法妥当区分盗窃罪和诈骗罪,与肯定权利人的同意排除盗窃罪构成要件的主张不相协调。处分是值得保护的财产价值实现方式,财产权是一种自我决定权,财产权的行使须反映权利人的真实意思,故处分意识必要说能够全面反映盗窃罪与诈骗罪的不法类型差异和不法程度差异,权利人的处分意识是构成诈骗罪的前提。在诈骗罪中,权利人的错误认识仅限于动机错误,而不包括对所处分财产本体属性的认识错误。在处分意识的程度要求上,应坚持严格的处分意识说,权利人须明确认识到其处分行为将转移自己对特定数量财产的占有或支配,但不必认识到被处分财产的价值。对财物重量的误认,只是不影响处分意识的动机错误。在一些特别交易类型中,权利人将若干财物组成集合物进行交付,而不在意组成该集合物的个别财物的个数,此时才能例外地承认整体性的处分意识。

The doctrine of unnecessity of disposition consciousness can’t properly distinguish steal from fraud,and is inconsistent with the proposition that the right holder’s consent shall exclude steal.Disposition is a proper means to realize the value of property and thus worthy of legal protection.Since property right is a self-determination right,the exercise of it must reflect the true intention of the right holder.The doctrine of necessity of disposition consciousness can support the comprehensive expression of differences between steal and fraud in the type and degree of their unlawfulness.Therefore,the right holder’s disposition consciousness is a fundamental premise of the constitution of fraud.In the crime of fraud,the right holder’s error only refers to the error about motive,in which the defective cognition of disposed property’s ontological attributes is not included.With the respect to the degree of disposition consciousness,the standpoint of a strict disposition consciousness should be firmly adhered to.The right holder must clearly understand that his disposition behavior would lead to the transfer of his possession of or domination over a specific amount of property,but needs not be aware of the value of the disposed property.The misunderstanding of the property’s weight is just an error about motive,which is irrelevant to the disposition consciousness.In some special types of transactions,the right holder packages several single items into a collection when delivering,without caring about the specific number of individual properties.Only in such situations can the general disposition consciousness as the whole be exceptionally admitted.Only when the victim has an accurate knowledge about the amount,can a conscious disposition of the creditor’s right for deposits be affirmed.