不作为诈骗罪的等价性要件分析  

Analysis of the Elements of Equivalence for the Negative Fraud

作　　者：曾之健 ZENG Zhijian(Wuhan University,Wuhan 430072,China)

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院,武汉430072

出　　处：《北京警察学院学报》2023年第1期31-37,共7页Journal of Beijing Police College

摘　　要：不真正不作为犯与作为犯存在结构上的本质差异,只有在行为人通过先行行为创设并支配了法益侵害危险或主动介入并控制了其他因素引起的法益侵害流程时,才能实现二者的等价。诈骗罪中欺骗行为的本质是利用不被允许的信息差风险支配被害人处分财产,只有排除了被害人自救可能性才能认为行为人建立起了对被害人处分财产的排他性支配。不作为只有在行为人实施了创设信息差风险之先行行为,并对被害人处分财产具有排他性支配时可构成欺骗行为。不作为欺骗与默示欺骗的区分,关键在于行为人创设信息差风险的行为能否被评价为实行行为。There is an essential difference in structure between inauthentic negative crimes and active crimes,and the equivalence of them two can only be achieved when the perpetrator commits a prior act that creates a risk of legal benefit infringement,or actively intervenes and controls the process of legal benefit infringement caused by other factors.The essence of deception in fraud is to use the impermissible risk of information difference to dominate the disposal of property by the victim,and only when the possibility of self-help by the victim is excluded can the perpetrator be considered to have established exclusive domination over the disposal of property by the victim.The negative act can only constitute an act of deception if the perpetrator has committed the prior act of creating the risk of information difference and has exclusive dominion over the disposal of property by the victim.The key to the distinction between deception by negative and implied deception is whether the act of creating the risk of information difference can be evaluated as an act of implementation.

关 键 词：诈骗罪 不真正不作为犯 等价性 先行行为 排他性支配 

分 类 号：D924.35[政治法律—刑法学]