“套路鉴”案件的定性——以诈骗罪的认定为切入的思考  

Judgement on“Fraudulent Appraisal Schemes”:Reflecting on the Determination of Fraud

作　　者：王志祥 袁淑娟 Wang Zhixiang;Yuan Shujuan(College for Criminal Law Science of Beijing Normal University,Beijing,100875)

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：《山东警察学院学报》2024年第1期5-13,共9页Journal of Shandong Police College

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“形式理性与实质理性的关系在刑法学中的展开研究”(项目编号:21BFX009)的阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：“套路鉴”案件罪与非罪争议的背后涉及诈骗罪认定的刑法理论问题,而实务中有关司法机关对此尚未予以充分认识,由此导致诈骗罪的成立范围不当地得以扩大。因此,有必要从欺骗行为的认定、认识错误与动机错误的区分、财产损失的认定、非法占有目的的认定等方面对“套路鉴”案件中诈骗罪的成立范围进行合理限缩。就判断交易型诈骗罪是否成立而言,主要应当关注两个核心问题:一是交易是否真实存在,二是交易是否为被害人所需要。在“套路鉴”案件中,如果鉴定公司提供了真实的鉴定服务,就可以认定交易是真实存在的;如果鉴定公司的宣传涉及一些价值判断的表述,应当认为被害人申请做鉴定是基于自身动机,可以认定交易是被害人所需要的。因此,对“套路鉴”案件能否以诈骗罪定性,不能一概而论。The controversy over the criminality of“fraudulent appraisal schemes”involves theoretical is-sues in the determination of fraud under criminal law.Judicial authorities have not yet fully recognized these issues in practice,leading to an undue expansion of the scope of fraud.Therefore,it is necessary to reasonably limit the scope of fraud in“fraudulent appraisal schemes”by examining the identification of deceptive con-duct,the distinction between cognitive errors and motive errors,the identification of property loss,and the i-dentification of intention of illegal possessing.In determining whether transactional fraud is established,two core questions should be considered:first,whether the transaction genuinely exists,and second,whether the transaction is needed by the victim.In“fraudulent appraisal schemes”,if the appraisal company provides genuine appraisal services,the transaction can be considered genuine;if the company’s publicity involves val-ue judgment statements,it should be considered that the victim’s request for the appraisal is based on their own motives,thus the transaction can be deemed needed by the victim.Therefore,whether“fraudulent ap-praisal schemes”can be characterized as fraud cannot be generalized.

关 键 词：“套路鉴” 诈骗罪 欺骗行为 认识错误 动机错误 财产损失 非法占有目的 

分 类 号：D914[政治法律—刑法学]