民事欺诈与刑事诈骗的界分——以《刑事审判参考》第1372号指导案例为中心  

Boundary between Civil Fraud and Criminal Fraud

作　　者：陈少青 CHEN Shaoqing

机构地区：[1]对外经济贸易大学法学院

出　　处：《法学评论》2023年第4期186-196,共11页Law Review

基　　金：2021年度国家社科基金青年项目“财产犯罪的财产损失之研究”(项目编号:21CFX023);对外经济贸易大学惠园优秀青年学者人才培育项目“法秩序统一视野下刑民交叉问题的解决路径”(项目编号:21YQ08)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：民事欺诈与刑事诈骗的界分主要存在两种路径:其一,以非法占有目的为核心,实质限定诈骗罪的成立范围;其二,以民事救济可能性为标准,确定民事调整的有效范围。两种路径之间具有共通性,现有规定列举的具有非法占有目的的情形均指向被害人因受骗而失去民事救济可能性,民事救济可能性是串联与非法占有目的相关的各项要素的逻辑主线。对于非法占有目的应采取“阶层式”判断:首先,当行为人欠缺履行能力时,直接认定具有非法占有目的,构成刑事诈骗;其次,当行为人具有履行能力时,需要进一步判断履行意愿,若欠缺履行意愿,则具有非法占有目的,构成刑事诈骗,若具有履行意愿,即便因意志以外的原因造成财产损失,也仅构成民事欺诈。The distinction between civil fraud and criminal fraud is primarily along two paths.Firstly,the purpose of unlawful possession is the core of the crime of fraud.Secondly,the possibility of civil remedy is the criterion to determine the effective scope of civil adjustment.There is a commonality between the two paths,and the typical cases of unlawful possession listed in the existing provisions all point to a high risk of the victim losing civil remedies as a result of being deceived.The possibility of civil remedy is the logical thread that links the elements related to the purpose of unlawful possession.The purpose of unlawful possession should be judged in a"hierarchical"manner.Firstly,when the perpetrator lacks the ability to perform,the purpose of unlawful possession is directly determined and it constitutes criminal fraud.Secondly,when the perpetrator has the ability to perform,the willingness to perform needs to be further judged.If there is a will to perform,even if the loss of property is caused by reasons other than the will,it only constitutes civil fraud.

关 键 词：民事欺诈 刑事诈骗 非法占有目的 民事救济可能性 

分 类 号：D924.35[政治法律—刑法学] D923[政治法律—法学]