發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-06-17 10:35

  本文選題：刑民交叉 + 先民后行再刑　； 參考：《南京師范大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：刑民交叉案件分為程序法上交叉和實(shí)體法上交叉兩大類,實(shí)體法上交叉的刑民交叉案件又可以分為刑民沖突型交叉和刑民重合型交叉。而刑民重合型交叉又因?yàn)樘幚斫Y(jié)果的不同可以分為,只需通過刑法的前置法來加以解決和需要追究刑事責(zé)任。對于實(shí)體法上刑民交叉的金融詐騙案件應(yīng)堅(jiān)持先民后行再刑的實(shí)體法邏輯進(jìn)路,民商法和行政法能夠調(diào)整的,就不需要?jiǎng)佑眯谭�；刑罰的動(dòng)用應(yīng)講求正當(dāng)性、必要性和效益性。它的合理性與正當(dāng)性在于,金融詐騙犯罪立法具有從屬性,金融詐騙罪自身具有較弱的悖德性、可譴責(zé)性且當(dāng)事人往往有過錯(cuò),以及我國金融詐騙罪的刑事政策正向金融交易本位主義、金融交易主體平等保護(hù)主義、綜合治理主義轉(zhuǎn)變,且民事、行政制裁同樣具有報(bào)應(yīng)和預(yù)防的雙重目的。對于民法上規(guī)定的合法行為,即使符合刑法上的犯罪構(gòu)成也無須進(jìn)行刑法評價(jià),而明確行政處罰與刑事處罰的界限應(yīng)主要考慮行為人的主觀惡性程度、有無民事救濟(jì)的可能以及被害人的意愿等。即使在超出民法調(diào)整范疇,需要追究刑事責(zé)任的情形下,民事責(zé)任的有效合理承擔(dān)可能對刑事責(zé)任的確定產(chǎn)生較大的影響,因此還應(yīng)關(guān)注對犯罪嫌疑人的救濟(jì),盡可能將犯罪嫌疑人無法彌補(bǔ)的損失降到最小。先民后行再刑需要有一定的社會基礎(chǔ),即非刑事預(yù)防機(jī)制成為金融犯罪預(yù)防機(jī)制的主要方面,民事、經(jīng)濟(jì)、行政預(yù)防手段的完善化、銜接化、制度化。
[Abstract]:Criminal and civilian cross cases can be divided into two categories: procedural law crossover and substantive law crossover. Criminal and civil cross cases can be divided into criminal conflict type and criminal and civil overlap type. The overlapping of criminal law and people can be divided into two categories because of the different processing results, which need only be solved by the law of criminal law and investigated for criminal responsibility. For the financial fraud cases where criminal law and people cross each other in substantive law, we should adhere to the logic way of substantive law, which can be adjusted by civil and commercial law and administrative law, and the use of penalty should be justified, necessary and beneficial. Its rationality and legitimacy lie in the fact that the legislation of financial fraud crime has subservience, and the crime of financial fraud has its own weak moral character, reprehensible, and the parties are often at fault. And the criminal policy of the crime of financial fraud in our country is turning to the localization of financial transaction, the equal protectionism of the subject of financial transaction, the transformation of comprehensive management doctrine, and the civil and administrative sanctions have the dual purpose of retribution and prevention. For the legal acts stipulated in the civil law, it is not necessary to evaluate the criminal law even if it conforms to the constitution of the crime in the criminal law, and the demarcation between the administrative punishment and the criminal punishment should mainly consider the subjective malignancy of the perpetrator. Whether there is the possibility of civil relief and the will of the victim and so on. Even if it is beyond the scope of civil law adjustment and criminal liability needs to be investigated, the effective and reasonable assumption of civil liability may have a greater impact on the determination of criminal liability. Therefore, attention should also be paid to the relief of criminal suspects. Minimize as much as possible the irreparable loss of a criminal suspect. The non-criminal prevention mechanism becomes the main aspect of the financial crime prevention mechanism, and the civil, economic and administrative preventive measures are perfect, connected and institutionalized.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.3;D923

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

中國期刊全文數(shù)據(jù)庫 前9條

1 龍宗智;論我國轉(zhuǎn)型期規(guī)制經(jīng)濟(jì)的刑事政策[J];法學(xué);2005年01期

2 潘庸魯;;被害人過錯(cuò):集資詐騙案件中一個(gè)應(yīng)然考量的情節(jié)因素——兼對吳英案的思考[J];長白學(xué)刊;2013年02期

3 游偉;;刑民關(guān)系與我國的刑事法實(shí)踐[J];華東刑事司法評論;2006年00期

4 賈宇;死刑的理性思考與現(xiàn)實(shí)選擇[J];法學(xué)研究;1997年02期

5 陳興良;金融詐欺的法理分析[J];中外法學(xué);1996年03期

6 高艷東;;詐騙罪與集資詐騙罪的規(guī)范超越:吳英案的罪與罰[J];中外法學(xué);2012年02期

7 高艷東;金融詐騙罪立法定位與價(jià)值取向探析[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2003年03期

8 陳興良;;形式解釋論的再宣示[J];中國法學(xué);2010年04期

9 趙輝;;拯救浙商——危機(jī)企業(yè)重整之路[J];中國企業(yè)家;2012年09期

，

本文編號：2030738