發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-06-17 07:57

  本文選題：非法拘禁 + 索債型�。� 參考：《華中師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)的不斷發(fā)展,人們之間經(jīng)濟(jì)交易日益密切,由此引起的經(jīng)濟(jì)債務(wù)糾紛明顯增多,某些債權(quán)人缺乏法律意識(shí),在運(yùn)用私力救濟(jì)手段實(shí)現(xiàn)債權(quán)的時(shí)候采取非法扣押、拘禁等手段去討回債務(wù)案件層出不窮。我國(guó)最高人民法院作出解釋規(guī)定:“行為人為索取高利貸、賭債等法律不予保護(hù)的債務(wù),非法扣押、拘禁他人的,依照刑法第二百三十八條定罪處罰”。這一規(guī)定將非法債務(wù)明確規(guī)定到了“債務(wù)”中去。索債型非法拘禁行為以存在一定的債權(quán)債務(wù)關(guān)系為前提、以索債為目的,采用非法拘禁、扣押等非法手段剝奪他人人身自由的特征。索債型非法拘禁行為的構(gòu)成要件表現(xiàn)為;主體屬于一般主體,主觀方面屬于故意犯罪,并且其行為目的就是為了索取債務(wù)而實(shí)施的非法拘禁、扣押等限制人身自由的行為;客體即他人的人身自由權(quán)利;客觀方面必須是采用非法拘禁、扣押等限制他人人身自由來(lái)索取債務(wù)。我將在這篇論文中從討取債務(wù)的不正當(dāng)囚禁行為的理論基礎(chǔ)入手,結(jié)合國(guó)內(nèi)外實(shí)證考察,對(duì)我國(guó)索債型非法拘禁行為認(rèn)定在理論上的分歧、立法中的不足和司法中的障礙進(jìn)行分析,進(jìn)而探討如何完善我國(guó)索債型非法拘禁行為相關(guān)規(guī)定的建議,這篇論文除去前言和結(jié)語(yǔ),我將從以下三個(gè)部分去分析。第一部分索債型非法拘禁行為的理論闡釋。解釋說(shuō)明索債型非法拘禁行為的涵義、主要特點(diǎn)以及它的構(gòu)成要件進(jìn)行全面剖析,通過(guò)與勒索型綁架罪進(jìn)行區(qū)分比較,明確索債型非法拘禁行為的認(rèn)定界限。第二部分國(guó)內(nèi)外索債型非法拘禁行為的實(shí)證考察。通過(guò)闡述國(guó)外對(duì)于討取債務(wù)運(yùn)用非法拘禁行為的有關(guān)法律法規(guī),得以借鑒,并連同我國(guó)現(xiàn)在對(duì)索債型非法拘禁行為的規(guī)定,以發(fā)現(xiàn)我國(guó)對(duì)索債型非法拘禁行為在理論上的分歧、立法中的不足與司法實(shí)踐中存在的障礙。比如,刑法將不法債務(wù)也囊括在索債型非法拘禁中,這樣勢(shì)必與民法理論相悖,從而為犯罪分子提供了借口等。第三部分完善我國(guó)索債型非法拘禁行為相關(guān)規(guī)定的建議。提出認(rèn)定索債型非法拘禁罪中“索要債務(wù)”的評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)應(yīng)重點(diǎn)從索債型債權(quán)人的主觀方面進(jìn)行分析,研究其社會(huì)危害性及犯罪構(gòu)成等建議。
[Abstract]:With the development of economy, the economic transaction between people is getting closer and closer, and the disputes caused by economic debt increase obviously. Some creditors lack legal consciousness and take illegal seizure when using private relief means to realize creditor's rights. Detention and other means to recover debt cases emerge in endlessly. The Supreme people's Court of our country has made an explanation: "the perpetrator shall be convicted and punished in accordance with Article 238 of the Criminal Law for illegally seizing and detaining others for debts not protected by law such as usury and gambling debts." This provision makes it clear that illegal debts are included in the "debt". The behavior of illegal detention is based on the existence of a certain relationship between creditor's rights and debts, and the characteristics of depriving others of their personal liberty by illegal means such as illegal detention and seizure. The constitutive elements of the illegal detention for debt type are: the subject belongs to the general subject, the subjective aspect belongs to the intentional crime, and the purpose of the act is to restrict the personal freedom, such as illegal detention and seizure in order to obtain the debt; The object is the right of personal liberty of others, and the objective aspect must be to restrict the personal freedom of others by illegal detention and seizure. In this paper, I will start with the theoretical basis of improper captivity of debt, combining with the empirical investigation at home and abroad, to identify the theoretical differences of illegal detention of debt type in our country. The deficiency in the legislation and the obstacles in the administration of justice are analyzed, and then the suggestions on how to perfect the relevant provisions of the illegal detention behavior of debt seeking in our country are discussed. This paper removes the preface and the conclusion, and I will analyze it from the following three parts. The first part is the theoretical explanation of illegal detention. This paper explains the meaning, main characteristics and its constitutive requirements of illegal detention for debt seeking. By comparing it with kidnapping of extortion type, it clarifies the limits of the identification of illegal detention for debt seeking. The second part is the empirical investigation of debt-seeking illegal detention at home and abroad. By expounding the relevant laws and regulations of foreign countries on the illegal detention for debt, we can draw lessons from it, and together with the provisions of our country on the illegal detention for debt, we can find out the differences in theory about the illegal detention for debt in our country. The deficiency in legislation and the obstacles in judicial practice. For example, criminal law also includes illegal debts in illegal detention, which is bound to contradict the theory of civil law, thus providing excuses for criminals and so on. The third part consummates our country's request debt type illegal detention behavior related stipulation suggestion. The author puts forward that the evaluation standard of "asking for debt" in the crime of illegal detention should be analyzed from the subjective aspect of the creditor, and the suggestion of its social harmfulness and the constitution of crime should be studied.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D924.34

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 李云林;;索債型非法拘禁的司法認(rèn)定[J];知識(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì);2012年17期

2 覃遠(yuǎn)春;;民法自然債五題略議[J];河北法學(xué);2010年01期

3 陳柱釗;;論索債型非法拘禁的司法認(rèn)定[J];江西公安�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2006年06期

4 鄧定遠(yuǎn),鄧定永;索債型非法拘禁罪若干問(wèn)題研究[J];政法學(xué)刊;2003年06期

5 劉憲權(quán),錢曉峰;關(guān)于綁架、拘禁索債型犯罪定性若干問(wèn)題研究[J];法學(xué);2001年09期

6 張明楷;論綁架勒贖罪[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));1996年01期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 李春玉;論索債型非法拘禁罪的若干問(wèn)題[D];吉林大學(xué);2011年

2 周笑竹;索債型非法拘禁罪研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年

3 周翠蘭;非法拘禁罪疑難問(wèn)題研究[D];煙臺(tái)大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：2030308