风险样态视阈下诈骗罪与盗窃罪的界限——以新型支付手段为例  

The Boundary between the Offences of Fraud and Theft in a Risk-like Perspective——Taking the New Means of Payment as an Example

作　　者：蔡超凡 Cai Chaofan(School of Criminal Justice China University of Political Science and Law,Beijing 100088,China)

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）》2024年第3期59-71,共13页Journal of Beijing University of Chemical Technology(Social Sciences Edition)

摘　　要：以“处分意识”作为诈骗罪与盗窃罪区分关键的传统路径将“欺骗行为——错误认识——处分行为”作为诈骗罪的成立条件,这不符合诈骗罪的实行行为以及责任归属的教义学要求。在诈骗罪的解读上应当坚持客观路径,即只有“欺骗行为”才是诈骗罪的成立条件,其余要件皆为诈骗罪的既遂要件,在“处分行为”要件内部亦无需考虑“处分意识”,这一路径得到了诈骗罪的历史沿革和不法本质(“真相权利侵害说”)的确证。因此,在两罪的区分上,应仰赖“欺骗行为”要件,即在借鉴客观归责理论的基础上,以“风险区分说”作为划分两罪的界限标准。依此,盗窃罪的“盗窃行为”创设的是针对财产法益的单一线性风险;而诈骗罪的“欺骗行为”创设的是直接引发被害人认识错误以及间接诱发被害人处分财产的聚合风险。在罪数关系上,两罪是法条竞合关系,诈骗罪是盗窃罪的减轻法条。The traditional path of using“disciplinary awareness”as the key to the distinction between the two offences is questionable,as it takes“deception-misconception-disposition”as the condition for the establishment of the offence of fraud,which does not meet the doctrinal requirements of the act of committing fraud and the attribution of responsibility.As a condition for the establishment of the offence of fraud,it is not in line with the implementation of the offence of fraud and the doctrinal requirements of the attribution of responsibility.In the interpretation of the offence of fraud should adhere to the objective path,only“deception”is the establishment of the crime of fraud,the rest of the elements are the elements of attempted fraud,in the“disposal behavior”elements do not need to take into account“disposal consciousness”,which is confirmed by the historical history and unlawful nature of the crime of fraud(“truth right infringement”).Therefore,the distinction between the two offenses should rely on the element of“deception”,and the“risk differentiation theory”should be used as the criterion for the demarcation of the boundary between the two offenses on the basis of the objective theory of attribution:the act of theft in the crime of larceny creates a single linear risk against the legal interests of the property;while the“deception”of fraud creates the aggregated risk of directly triggering the victim’s cognitive error and indirectly inducing the victim to dispose of the property.In terms of the number of offenses,the two offenses are competing statutes,with fraud being a mitigating statute for theft.

关 键 词：欺骗行为 处分意识 单一风险 聚合风险 竞合关系 

分 类 号：D924.35[政治法律—刑法学]