日本刑法中的“存款占有”:嬗变、评析与启示

“Deposit Possession”in Japanese Criminal Law:Evolution,Analysis and Enlightenment

日本关于存款占有问题的讨论,表现为存款名义人占有说与银行占有说关于“现金的占有归属”问题之争。由于能够确保刑罚适用的均衡,存款名义人占有说在日本逐渐处于通说地位,法律支配的占有概念也因此为学界所接受。在研究我国的存款占有问题时,参考日式经验确有必要。但是一方面,存款名义人占有说自身仍有诸多缺陷,能否将其应用于我国司法实践还需慎重考虑;另一方面,在现有引用存款名义人占有说处理我国存款占有问题的讨论中,学者们对学说的基本内容仍然缺乏统一、准确的认识。中日两国的立法差异表明,我国存款占有的研究不能仅考虑“存款现金的占有归属”,还应一并考虑“存款债权的占有归属”。对前者的判断不存在争议,对后者的判断可考虑引入“准占有”。

The discussion of“Deposit Possession”in Japan is manifested in the dispute between the nominal person-possessory theory and the bank-possessory theory on the ownership of cash.Because it can ensure the balance of penalty application,the nominal person-possessory theory has gradually become a general theory in Japan,and the concept of possession dominated by law has therefore been accepted by the academic community.When studying the issue of Deposit Possession in China,it is necessary to refer to Japanese experience.However,on the one hand,the nominal person-possessory theory still has many defects,and whether it can be applied to China’s judicial practice should be carefully considered,on the other hand,in the current discussion on how to use the nominal person-possessory theory to deal with the problem of“Deposit Possession”in China,scholars still lack a unified and accurate understanding of the basic content of the theory.The legislative differences between China and Japan indicate that the study of deposit possession in China should not only consider“the ownership of cash”,but also consider“the ownership of deposit creditor’s rights”.There is no dispute about the judgment of the former,and the“quasi possession”system can be introduced into the judgment of the latter.