反思秘密窃取说与和平窃取说之争——兼论强拿硬要的行为定性  

Reflect on the Argument between Secret Steal Theory and Peace Steal Theory——Concurrently on the Nature of Forcibly Taking

作　　者：陈凌剑[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学刑事司法学院,北京100088

出　　处：《北京化工大学学报（社会科学版）》2015年第4期20-25,12,共7页Journal of Beijing University of Chemical Technology(Social Sciences Edition)

摘　　要：以非法占有为目的、违背他人意志、公开转移占有财物的行为的定性问题是秘密窃取说与和平窃取说争论的焦点。秘密窃取说通过扩张抢夺的范围,而和平窃取说则采取扩张盗窃的范围为这一行为定性。对强拿硬要行为的定性应当脱离二者的争论,通过文义解释以确定盗窃与抢夺的可能文义来确定行为的性质。通过解释可以得出,行为本身无法与盗窃或抢夺相契合,而通过分析该行为特征,得出将行为定性为敲诈勒索的合理结论。The determination on the nature of the act of violating the will of other people, and transferring the possession of property, for the purpose of illegal possession has became the focus of the argument between secret steal theory and peace steal theory. To solve this problem, the secret steal theory chose to expand the scope of forcibly seizes while the peace steal theory chose to expand the scope of steals. To determine the nature of behaviors, the forcibly seizing and stealing must be explained by semantic interpretation. It can be drawn from the explanation that, the act is neither stealing nor forcibly seizing, and by analyzing the characteristics of the behavior, we may come to the conclusion that such behavior should be regarded as racketeering.

关 键 词：秘密窃取 和平窃取 文义解释 强拿硬要 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]