偷租行为的刑法定性——以确证利益盗窃为切入点

The Definition of Criminal Law of Stealing Rent——To Corroborate Profit Theft as the Breakthrough Point

学界对偷租行为的刑法定性,主要有盗窃罪和诈骗罪两种解决路径。但普通诈骗罪说无视被害人界定的重要意义,三角诈骗罪说缺失“适格处分行为”这一核心要素。相对而言,将偷租行为定性为盗窃罪更为可取。偷租行为并非是对不动产本身的“窃取”,而是对不动产载体所征表的刑法意义上的财产性利益的“僭权”。换言之,偷租行为的准确定性就是利益盗窃如何确证的刑法问题。而因利益的消长变动与有体物的物理转移具有明显的区别,应根据财产性利益的特性,形塑不同于“转移占有”的“侵入财产领域”+“取得利益”的专属于利益盗窃的行为构造,如此可周延地解决偷租行为的刑法难题。

There are mainly two ways to solve the problem of stealing rent.However,the common fraud theory ignores the significance of the definition of the victim,and the triangle fraud theory lacks the core element of“proper punishment”.Relatively speaking,it is more advisable to classify the act of stealing rent as theft.But at this time,it is not the“theft”of the real estate itself,but the“tyranny”of property interests in the sense of criminal law imposed by the real estate carrier.In other words,the exact definition of rent-stealing behavior is the criminal law problem of how to confirm the benefit theft.Because of the obvious difference between the fluctuation of interest and the transfer of property,the behavior structure of“invasion of property domain”+“gain of interest”,which is different from“transfer of possession”,should be shaped according to the characteristics of property interests,which is exclusive to the theft of interest,so as to solve the criminal problem of rent-stealing.