發(fā)布時間：2018-03-13 22:27

  本文選題：信用證欺詐　切入點：獨立抽象原則　出處：《中國政法大學》2003年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】： 信用證以銀行信用代替商業(yè)信用大大減少了國際貿(mào)易貨款結(jié)算中的風險，，是國際貿(mào)易中使用最廣泛的結(jié)算方式，也是最重要的一種資金融通方式，被譽為國際貿(mào)易的“生命血液”。 自從中國銀行1987年7月1日起在所有開出的信用證中加上“本信用證按照國際商會第400號跟單信用證統(tǒng)一慣例的條款開立”的字樣，表明中國銀行界正式把UCP當作國際慣例加以接受之后，中國大陸這片凈土也開始遭到信用證欺詐無情的進犯。近年來信用證欺詐案件涉及的數(shù)額越來越大，超過1億元人民幣的案件也不在少數(shù)。這一現(xiàn)象日益引起人們的極大關注，它已經(jīng)給正常的貿(mào)易秩序和銀行結(jié)算秩序造成了嚴重危害。特別是隨著我國加入世貿(mào)組織，國內(nèi)與國際市場實現(xiàn)充分接軌，對信用證欺詐及其法律救濟問題的研究和探討有著很緊迫的現(xiàn)實意義。本文試從信用證欺詐產(chǎn)生的溫床——信用證制度的獨立抽象原則，和欺詐的救濟手段——信用證制度的欺詐例外原則入手，論證對信用證欺詐進行法律救濟過程中，英美法國家先進的實踐經(jīng)驗，和我國存在的主要問題以及解決方案。 引言部分：主要介紹信用證的含義，其獨立抽象性作為信用證制度的基石，在使信用證制度優(yōu)越于其他類似制度的同時，也已經(jīng)成為信用證欺詐行騙的溫床。 第一部分：論述信用證欺詐的定義和成因。參照欺詐在普通法判例中概念的界定，和英美成文法和判例法中有關于信用證欺詐的界定，本文試總結(jié)出信用證欺詐的定義。信用證的欺詐，是指信用證交易的當事人，在信用證本身，或信用證交易中的某個環(huán)節(jié)中，故意曲解事實真相，包括故意告知他方虛假事實或者故意隱瞞應披露的事實，從而使他方遭受財產(chǎn)損失或者使其有受到財產(chǎn)損失的實際威脅，并意在使自己從中獲取不法利益的行為。誠然，表面上看來，信用證欺詐行為的低成本，低風險，和高利潤使得此種欺詐行為無本萬利，是一項成功率極高的生意。但究其根本，信用證制度的獨立原則，獨立原則所蘊涵的抽象原則，獨立抽象原則合二為一進而派生出的表面一致原則和嚴格相符原則是信用證欺詐產(chǎn)生的根源，因為這些原則無一不為欺詐者得手之后全身而 WP=4 退提供了掩護。那么拋棄獨立抽象原則的做法是否可行？無論對信用證關系的哪方當事人來講拋棄這一原則都是弊大于利而根本不敢想象的事情，因為正如無因性原則之對于票據(jù)一樣，獨立抽象原則具有其存在的必要性，它是整個信用證制度的基石，信用證制度與其是魚水關系密不可分。 （獨立原則→抽象原則→表面一致原則嚴格相符原則→信用證欺詐） 第二部分：論述信用證欺詐的判定標準和類型研究。 首先，確定信用證欺詐的判定標準，是判斷一個行為是否構(gòu)成信用證欺詐，能否適用欺詐例外原則的前提，一般只有實質(zhì)性欺詐法院才可給予禁令。綜觀世界各國的做法，英美等國的法官通過判例顯示出他們對衡量是否構(gòu)成欺詐采用嚴格標準，強調(diào)欺詐事實的客觀存在，強調(diào)從維護信用證的正常運行，維護銀行國際聲譽的高度來審慎地對待欺詐問題。在此本文暫且提出衡量受益人行為是否構(gòu)成信用證欺詐以至可以啟動欺詐例外原則的三個初步標準，即欺詐行為是否客觀存在；欺詐故意是否存在；欺詐行為是否造成損失和損失的大小。在作出此初步抽象分析之后，第三部分中將對適用欺詐例外原則的標準做更加深入具體的探討。 其次，本文根據(jù)欺詐受害者的不同，將欺詐大體上分為三大類：受益人可能遇到的欺詐；銀行可能遇到的欺詐；以及開證申請人可能遇到的受益人欺詐三大類型來研究。 其中受益人可能遇到的欺詐本文總結(jié)有：申請人或開征行利用假冒信用證進行欺詐；信用不良的銀行開立真實但無償付能力的信用證對受益人進行的欺詐；開證申請人利用信用證軟條款騙取貨物或預付金、定金、開證手續(xù)費。文本繼而在此討論了在通知行未盡合理注意義務導致受益人遇欺詐情況下，通知行的責任承擔問題。如果通知行在主觀上有過錯；其未盡合理注意義務的行為與受益人接受該信用證有因果關系，并且受益人因此而受到損失的情況下，則通知行應該承擔相應的責任。 銀行可能遇到的欺詐本文總結(jié)有：受益人對開證行或保兌行的欺詐；開證申請人與受益人對銀行的合謀欺詐；開證申請人對開證行的欺詐。 開證申請人可能遇到的受益人欺詐本文總結(jié)有：偽造單據(jù)；涂改單據(jù)（預借提單、倒簽提單、憑保函換取清潔提單）；用無提單的方式進行欺詐。在預借提單和倒簽提單情況下，本文認定承運人的行為構(gòu)成欺詐性侵權(quán)行為，而托 WP=5 運人的行為構(gòu)成違約行為和欺詐性侵權(quán)行為的競合。另外，針對憑保函換取清潔提單和用無提單方式提貨的行為要具體分析，若出于善意則不構(gòu)成欺詐。 第三部分：從借鑒英美成文法和判例法中關于信用證欺詐的先進理論和實踐經(jīng)驗出發(fā)，論述信用證欺詐例外原則及其司法救濟。本文認為信用證欺詐例外原則的適用有其深厚的理論依據(jù)，在法理上其適用來源于各國的公共秩序保留原則、國際商事法律普遍遵循的誠實信用原則和欺詐使一切歸于無效的原則。例外原則經(jīng)由美國里程碑判例Szetjn案和美國統(tǒng)一商法典第五編信用證篇所確立和肯認，并通過著名判例United City Merchants一案在英國得到普遍接受和認可。綜
[Abstract]:The letter of credit instead of commercial credit by bank credit has greatly reduced the risk of settlement in international trade settlement. It is the most widely used way of settlement in international trade, and is also the most important way of financing. It is known as the "blood of life" in international trade.
Since July 1, 1987 in all Chinese bank letter of credit with the credit according to the ICC uniform customs and practices for documentary credit No. 400th terms ", after that Chinese banks officially UCP as international convention to accept Chinese, this piece of land has also been ruthlessly invaded. The letter of credit fraud in recent years, letter of credit fraud involving an increasingly large amount of more than 100 million yuan, the case is not in the minority. This phenomenon has aroused people's attention, it has caused serious harm to the normal trade order and bank settlement order. Especially with China's accession to the WTO, the domestic and international markets to achieve full the letter of credit standards, to study and explore the problems of fraud and its legal remedy has realistic meaning very urgent. This article from the hotbed of fraud of letter of credit - the credit system of independent abstract principle of fraud and remedies -- system of letter of credit fraud exception principle, proof of credit fraud, legal relief process, advanced experience of common law countries, and the main problems existing in our country and the solutions.
The introduction part mainly introduces the meaning of the letter of credit, its independent abstraction as the cornerstone of the letter of credit system, making the letter of credit system superior to other similar systems, and has also become the hotbed of the letter of credit fraud and deception.
The first part discusses the definition and causes of credit fraud fraud. According to definition in common law cases, and the Anglo American statute law and case law on the letter of credit fraud is defined, this paper tries to summarize the definition of credit fraud. The letter of credit fraud, credit refers to the parties in credit the letter of credit itself, a link or the credit in the transaction, intentionally distorted the truth, including other deliberately told false facts or intentionally concealing facts should be disclosed, so that the other party suffered loss of property or the actual threat by property loss, and to make their own benefit from access to illegal behavior. Indeed, on the surface, low cost, low risk of credit fraud, the fraud and high profits make profits, is a very high success rate of the business. But after all, the credit system of the independent In principle, the abstract principles of the principle of independence and the principle of independent and abstract principles are combined into one, and the principle of surface consistency and strict compliance are the root causes of the fraud of letter of credit, because all of these principles are all successful for fraudsters.
WP=4
Provide back cover. Then abandoned the principle of independence of the practice feasible? Is more harm than good and did not dare to imagine things which party regardless of the credit relationship in terms of the abandonment of the principle as WuYinXing principle for the bill, the principle of independence is the necessity of its existence, it is the foundation of credit system, credit system and its relation is inseparable.
(independent principle, abstract principle, strict conformity principle of the principle of surface agreement and credit fraud)
The second part: discuss the criterion and type of the letter of credit fraud.
First, determine the standards of credit fraud, is to determine whether an act constitutes fraud of letter of credit, the premise can apply the principle of fraud exception, only substantial fraud can give the court injunction. In many countries, Britain and other countries to show their judges through cases of fraud by strict measure standard, the objective existence of fraud emphasizes the fact, emphasize from the normal operation and maintenance of credit, the bank to maintain international reputation to careful fraud. This paper put forward a preliminary measure for the three beneficiary acts constitute fraud of letter of credit that can start the fraud exception principle, namely whether fraud exists; the intention of fraud the existence of fraud; whether the loss and the size of the loss. After making the preliminary abstract analysis, the third part of. Use the standard of fraud exception principle to do more in-depth and concrete discussion.
Secondly, according to the difference of fraud victims, fraud is generally divided into three categories: fraud that a beneficiary may encounter, fraud that banks may encounter, and three types of fraudulent fraudulence that the applicant may encounter.
The beneficiary may encounter fraud in this paper are: the applicant or the issuing bank for the use of fake letters of credit fraud; bad credit bank to the beneficiary for real but insolvent credit fraud; the applicant by the soft clause in letter of credit cheat goods or deposit and deposit, the issuing fee on the text. Discussed in the advising bank fails to exercise reasonable care obligations to the beneficiary in the fraud case, assume the responsibility of advising bank. If the advising bank is on the subjective fault; not entirely the duty of reasonable care behavior and benefit people to accept the letter of credit has a causal relationship, and the beneficiaries suffer losses under the condition that the notice should bear the corresponding responsibility.
The fraud that banks may encounter is summarized as follows: the fraud of the beneficiary on the issuing bank or confirming bank; the fraud of the applicant and the beneficiary against the bank; the fraud of the applicant on the issuing bank.
The applicant may encounter fraud in this paper are: forged documents; altered documents (bill of lading, Daoqiantidan, by letter of indemnity for a clean bill of lading); fraud by the bill of lading. Bill of lading in pre and Daoqiantidan, this paper finds the carrier's behavior constituted fraud violations, and support
WP=5
The act of transporting people constitutes a concurrence of breach of contract and fraudulent infringement. In addition, we should specifically analyze the act of exchanging a clean bill of lading with a guarantee, and taking delivery without bill of lading, if it is good faith, it will not constitute fraud.
The third part: from Reference English statute law and case law on the advanced theory and practical experience of credit card fraud, discusses the principle of fraud exception and its judicial relief. This paper argues that the application of the principle of fraud exception has its profound theoretical basis, its application in the legal sources from the principle of reservation of public order. International commercial law generally follow the principle of honesty and credit and fraud makes everything invalid. The principle of exception by the case Szetjn case and milepost UCC article fifth for credit establishment and recognition, and through the famous case of United Merchants case City in the UK are generally accepted and recognized fully.

【學位授予單位】：中國政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2003
【分類號】：D917

【引證文獻】

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 王艷斌;信用證欺詐例外原則的適用與完善[D];大連海事大學;2011年

2 裴一陽;信用證欺詐的法律救濟問題研究[D];上海交通大學;2010年

本文編號：1608401