再论刑法中的财产概念:梳理与回应

Re-discussing the Concept of Property in Criminal Law:Analysis and Response

“财物”包括财产性利益,这已成共识,问题是如何对其作具体理解。劳务本身并非财产性利益,只有利用了有偿劳务却最终逃避支付相应对价的行为,才属于财产性利益。刑法中的“财物”应该和“财产”作同一理解,原则上应为有经济价值的物,具有主观情感价值的物在例外场合也可能成为“财物”。法律经济财产说虽试图折中,却会导致处罚漏洞和处罚不均衡。财产概念中新视角的导入有启发价值,对(修正的)经济财产说的各种质疑也不乏值得倾听之处。不过,在综合考虑客观与主观、人与物、此财产罪与彼财产罪等各种因素之后,仍有必要坚持(修正的)经济财产说。经济财产说得到了实践的检验,也不应该被理解为是过时的学说。

There has formed a consensus that"belonging"includes the property interest,and the issue is how to specifically understand it.Labor service itself is not property interest,and only the act of utilizing paid labor and finally evading corresponding payment concerns a property interest.The term of"property"and"belonging"in the criminal law should be understood as having the same meaning,i.e.an object with economic value in principle and an object with subjectively emotional value in exceptional cases.Although the doctrine of"legal economic property"tries to make a compromise,its application leads to loopholes and imbalance in punishment.The introduction of new perspectives in the concept of property enjoys inspiring value,and various criticisms of the(modified)doctrine of economic property are worthy of consideration.Nonetheless,after considering various factors,objective and subjective,people and object,one crime against property and another crime against property,it is still necessary to insist on the(modified)doctrine of economic property.The doctrine of economic property survives the test of practice and should not be understood as an outdated theory.