占有辅助人非法占有财物行为的定性——以收银员非法占有货款案件为例

The Significance on the Behavior of the Auxiliary Possessor Illegally Occupies Property——Take the Cashier’s Illegal Possession of Payment for Goods as an Example

司法实践中,对于占有辅助人非法占有财物行为如何定性存在着成立盗窃罪、侵占罪、职务侵占罪三种不同结论。分析收银员非法占有货款为例研究发现,对此类案件定性时,需要以是否占有财物重新划定盗窃罪与职务侵占罪的区分标准,根据“授权说”判断行为人是否具有相应处分权限,以是否具有处分权限作为辅助占有情况下占有归属的判断标准。因案例中收银员不具有处分收银所得货款的权限,故当收银员非法占有货款时,应成立盗窃罪。

In judicial practice,take the cashier illegally occupies the property as an example,there are great differences on what crime should be established when the auxiliary possessor illegally occupies property.In order to solve this problem,we not only need to redefine the distinction between theft and duty embezzlement based on the presence or absence of possession,but also take the disposition authority as the judgment standard for the presence or absence of possession in the case of auxiliary possession. According to the authorization,we can judge whether the actor has disposition authority or not.Because the cashier does not have the authority to dispose of the property,when the cashier illegally occupies the property,the cashier is guilty of theft.