非法集资犯罪司法疑难问题探讨  

Some judicial problems on illegal fundraising

作　　者：彭新林 PENG Xin lin

机构地区：[1]北京师范大学刑事法律科学研究院,北京100875

出　　处：《东南大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2020年第1期81-92,147,共13页Journal of Southeast University(Philosophy and Social Science)

基　　金：中国法学会2018年度部级法学研究课题“P2P网络平台非法集资行为刑事规制研究”(CLS(2018)Y4)阶段性成果。

摘　　要：非法集资犯罪是备受社会关注的涉众型经济犯罪,其在司法实务中存在着共同犯罪认定难、集资参与人诉讼地位定位难、刑民交叉处理难、财物处置难等难题。对非法集资共同犯罪人犯意的判断,应立足行为共同说的立场,认真考量共谋的犯意是否存在以非法占有为目的。以犯罪事实支配理论为根据,能准确把握非法集资犯罪主犯与从犯的界限标准。对非法集资共同犯罪中犯罪数额的认定,应坚持分担数额、分别认定的立场。对于非法集资犯罪刑民交叉的现象,应根据集资参与人是否已通过民事诉讼得到赔偿等情形,按照先刑后民等原则处理。基于集资参与人身份的双重属性,应将其定位为特别被害人,充分保障其实体权利,对诉讼权利实行限度保护。对于非法集资犯罪财产处置中的难点以及涉案财产刑事处置程序的短板,应采取有效措施予以破解,包括在追赃挽损中注意采取"保护性措施",理性确定退赔的责任主体及责任大小,实现刑事追缴、退赔与破产程序的有机衔接。It is agreed that illegal fundraising is harmful to the public interest,but in the judicial practice it is difficult to identify complicity,decide between criminal law and civil law,and dispose of property,which to some extent have reduced the effectiveness of crackdown on illegal fundraising. In view of this,we offer the following suggestions. 1. We should seriously consider whether the intention of complicity is illegal possession. 2. The dominance theory of criminal facts helps accurately decide between the principal criminal and the accomplice. 3. We should put criminal law before civil law when handling illegal fundraising crimes. 4. About the dual identities of the participants,we think the participants are special victims.

关 键 词：非法集资犯罪 集资参与人 共同犯罪 刑民交叉 财产处置 

分 类 号：D914[政治法律—刑法学]