关系人参与受贿的共犯认定问题研究(硕士)(论文45000字)
摘要
国家工作人员身边人参与受贿犯罪，其主体界定应当采用“关系人”的概念。“特定关系人”的概念存在证成难题与理论区分困难的困境，“关系密切人”在概念上存在诸如影响力说、共同利益关系说、二次判断说等界定难题。国家工作人员身边人参与国家工作人员受贿犯罪的认定采用“关系人”的概念，有效的解决证成难题与外延模糊等难以界定的问题。“关系人”的刑法含义可以解释为：“对国家工作人员产生心理或实际的特殊影响力，并基于此种特殊影响力使得国家工作人员实施了职权行为的人。”在利用影响力受贿罪方面，从方法上使用“关系人”一词代替“其他关系密切的人”、“近亲属”和“离职的国家工作人员”；在受贿罪的共犯领域，运用“关系人”的概念概括面广，有利于防止处罚漏洞，同时统一了法律术语，避免了规范证成的矛盾。
关系人参与国家工作人员受贿的共犯认定应当首先明确共犯认定的立场。在关系人参与受贿共犯的分类立场上摒弃违背定罪量刑逻辑规律的作用分类法，坚持符合共犯认定逻辑的分工分类法，在共犯分类区分立场上存在犯罪事实支配理论的例外，承认受贿共同犯罪中适用义务犯理论。在关系人参与受贿共犯的本质立场上，坚持从属性说，以共犯的实行从属性、要素从属性以及罪名从属性为立论基础。在关系人参与国家工作人员受贿犯罪的共犯与身份问题上，关系人身份决定利用影响力受贿罪的罪名成立，利用影响力受贿罪属于纯正的身份犯；关系人身份在受贿罪共犯领域不属于特殊身份，而是出于以概念上的方便，统一逻辑上矛盾的法律术语所需要的一般身份。
关系人参与国家工作人员受贿的共犯客观方面认定主要包含共犯行为的认定和客观情节的认定。其中，关系人参与受贿的共犯行为认定应当从关系人加功于国家工作人员、国家工作人员加功于关系人以及国家工作人员与关系人共同实施受贿行为三个方面进行具体分析。在国家工作人员与关系人共同受贿的场合，应当首先厘清利用影响力受贿罪与受贿罪共犯之间不存在法条竞合关系，进而得出关系人与国家工作人员共同受贿场合的行为认定存在身份犯竞合问题，按照想象竞合的原理全面评价。客观情节的认定分为数额情节的认定与非数额情节的认定。关于数额情节的认定，主要把握在定罪方面，按照共同实施行为所造成数额结果的全部定罪；在量刑方面，按照国家工作人员与关系人在共同受贿中所起到的作用量刑，符合具有直接因果性的共同实行犯定罪标准。关于八种非数额情节的认定，需要结合相关的共同犯罪原理进行分析。
关系人参与国家工作人员受贿的共犯主观方面认定重点把握“通谋”的认定。凡是基于共同的意思联络形成了实施受贿犯罪构成要件内某一方面的内容时即可认定为存在通谋。对于通谋的认定规则，关系人与国家工作人员只需要具备意思联络的情况下具有行为的共同性即可以肯定共犯关系的成立，不论事先亦或事中进行“通谋”均不影响共犯关系的成立。关于2016两高《关于办理贪污贿赂刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》第16条第2款规定的关系人受贿中国家工作人员主观故意的认定问题，学界主要存在事后故意型受贿罪、受贿行为的法律拟制以及刑事推定说三种观点，三种观点均存在不足之处。对于该条款的理解，应当站在实质解释的视角，将该条款解释为：特定关系人索取、收受他人财物，国家工作人员知情后仍然为请托人谋取了利益，未退还或者上交的，应当认定国家工作人员具有受贿故意。
关键词：关系人 受贿 共犯 认定立场
Abstract
The person around national staff participates in the bribery crime, the concept of "related person" should be adopted in the definition of the subject. The concept of "specific related person" has difficulties in proving difficult problems and difficult to distinguish from theory.The "closely related person" has a concept of criminal dogmatism, such as the theory of influence, the theory of common interest and the two judgment.The concept of "related person" is adopted by the person around national staff participates in the bribery crime,it will solve the problems that are difficult to define.The criminal meaning of "related person" can be explained as follows:"A person who has a special psychological or practical influence on a national worker, and is based on such a special influence that has made the state staff perform the act of power."In terms of influencing the crime of accepting bribes, we use the word "related person" instead of "closely related persons", "close relatives" and "leaving state staff".In the field of complicity, the concept of "relational person" is widely used, which is conducive to preventing punishment loopholes. Meanwhile, it unified the legal terminology and avoided the contradiction between standard and certification.
We should make clear the position of the cognizance of the accomplice on the related person participate in the bribery crime of national staff firstly. We should discard the function of violating the law of conviction and sentencing, and adhere to the classification of labor which is consistent with the logic of accomplice identification. There are exceptions to the theory of the domination of criminal facts in the position of the classification of the accomplice, and we should admit the theory of the application of the compulsory criminal in common crime of bribery. On the essential position of the related persons involved in the bribery crime, we must adhere to the attribute theory, based on the nature of the accomplice's execution, elements and attributes, and the attribution of accusation. In relation to the participation of the related persons in the accomplice and identity of the national staff's bribery crime, the related person's identity decides to take the crime of using the influence to take bribes, and the crime of taking bribes by influence is a pure identity crime.The identity of related person is not a special identity in the field of complicity of bribery crime, but a general identity required for the unification of logically contradictory legal terms.
The objective aspects of the accomplice involved in the bribery of the national staff mainly include the cognizance of the accomplice and the identification of the objective plot. The cognizance of the accomplice of the related person involved in bribery should be analyzed from three aspects: the related person,the national staff, the national staff and the related persons to carry out the bribery. In the common bribery of national staff and the related person, we should first clarify there is no legal competition relationship between the use of the crime of influence bribery and the accomplice of the crime of bribery.Furthermore, it is concluded that the behavior of the joint bribery situation between the people and the state staff is found to be the problem of the identity crime, and it is evaluated in a comprehensive way according to the principle of imaginative concurrence.The determination of the objective plot is divided into the determination of the amount of the plot and the identification of the non-amount plot. With regard to the determination of the amount of the plot, the main conviction of the conviction is the total conviction of the amount resulting from the common practice. In terms of sentencing, it is in line with the role played by the state staff and their partners in the joint bribery, which is consistent with the direct conviction and convictions of joint offenders. The determination of the eight kinds of non-amount plots needs to be analyzed in combination with the related principles of common crime.
The subjective aspects of the accomplice involved in the bribery of the national staff should grasp the cognizance of "collusion". All the common meaning contact form based on the implementation of the crime of bribery constitute a crime within the content can be identified as collusion.The rules of the cognizance of collusion, national staff only need to have common behavior has meaning of contact situations that can be definitely established accomplices, regardless of "the plans" were not affected in advance or complicity in the establishment.In 2016, the Supreme People's court and the Procuratorate's interpretation of several issues concerning the application of the law in dealing with corruption and bribery cases, the provisions of the sixteenth clause and the second paragraph, the related persons' bribery, the identification of the subjective intent of the national staff. There are three main points of view in the academic circles, namely, the crime of intentional bribery, the legal system of bribery and the criminal presumption, and the three points of view are inadequacies. For the understanding of the terms, should stand in the perspective of substantive interpretation, the terms explained as: the specific person ask for and accept others' property, the national staff informed still as trustees to seek benefits, not return or surrender, should be identified with the national staff bribery intention.
Key words: the related person；bribery；accomplice；cognizance of position
目录
引言 1
一、受贿共同犯罪中“关系人”概念之提倡 4
（一）“特定关系人”与“关系密切人”的界定难题 4
（二）“关系人”概念的确立与范围厘定 9
二、关系人参与受贿的共犯认定立场 13
（一）关系人参与受贿的共犯分类立场 13
（二）关系人参与受贿的共犯本质立场 17
（三）关系人参与受贿的共犯与身份立场 21
三、关系人参与受贿的共犯客观方面认定 26
（一）关系人参与受贿的共犯行为认定 26
（二）关系人参与受贿的共犯量刑情节认定 35
四、关系人参与受贿的共犯主观方面认定 41
（一）关系人与国家工作人员通谋的认定 41
（二）关系人受贿中国家工作人员故意的认定 44
结论 51
参考文献 52
致谢 56
|
