“截贿”行为的定性:中外比较与借鉴

The Determination of the Criminal Act of“Intercepting Bribes”:A Comparison and Reference Between China and Foreign Countries

“截贿”行为如何定性处理,在中外刑法理论与实践中均颇具争议。究其原因,还在于对委托人将行贿款物交付受托人这一行为的性质认识不清。行贿人基于不法原因而给付受托人的财物,受托人只是暂时持有,该财物所有权并未发生终局性的转移。受托人在这一过程中的“截贿”行为,可能构成财产性犯罪。“截贿”行为的性质呈现多样性,根据财物的性质以及非法占有目的产生的不同时间节点,行为人既可能构成诈骗罪、侵占罪,也可能构成行贿罪或受贿罪的共犯,实务中需在贯彻正确的审判理念的基础上,根据不同情况进行类型化处理。

How to deal with the“intercepting bribes”qualitatively is controversial both in domestic and foreign criminal law theory and practice.The root cause of this problem lies in that unclear understanding of the nature of the principal’s act of delivering bribes to the trustee.The bribe giver pays the property to the trustee for illegal reasons,and the trustee only holds it temporarily,and the ownership of the property has not undergone a final transfer.The trustee’s“intercepting bribes”behavior during this process may constitute a property crime.The nature of the act of“intercepting bribes”is diversified.Based on the nature of the property and the different time nodes of the illegal possession purpose,the perpetrator may constitute fraud,embezzlement,or accomplice in bribery or bribery.In practice,it is necessary to implement correct judicial principles and classify according to different situations.