合同诈骗罪与表见代理之实体法律关系厘清  

Clarification of the Substantive Legal Relationship between Contract Fraud Crime and Apparent Agency

作　　者：袁也 Ye Yuan(Humanities and Law School,Chengdu University of Technology,Chengdu Sichuan)

机构地区：[1]成都理工大学文法学院,四川成都

出　　处：《法学（汉斯）》2024年第10期6238-6242,共5页Open Journal of Legal Science

摘　　要：合同诈骗罪与表见代理刑民交叉的矛盾症结在于刑民实体法律关系尚未得到厘清,从而导致刑事程序与民事程序适用混乱,解决思路应聚焦于如何在法体系中合理解释及运用两种法律规范。从法秩序统一性角度,以目的冲突理论、规范冲突理论等学说观点分析合同诈骗罪与表见代理能否共存没有实质意义,只有从如何适用两种规范的实务角度切入,才能有效解决此项刑民交叉问题。表见代理的成立使犯罪事实中有关行为对象、被害人等要件更符合刑法领域内的职务侵占罪或挪用资金罪等其他财产类罪名,同一行为不可能在成立表见代理的同时构成合同诈骗罪。The crux of the contradiction of the intersection of criminal and civil issues between contract fraud crime and apparent agency lies in the fact that the substantive legal relationship between criminal and civil laws has not been clarified,resulting in confusion in the application of criminal and civil procedures.The solution should focus on how to reasonably interpret and apply the two legal norms in the legal system.From the perspective of the unity of legal order,in terms of the overall evaluation of criminal law and civil law,analyzing whether contract fraud crime and apparent agency can coexist based on theoretical viewpoints such as the theory of purpose conflict and the theory of norm conflict has no substantive significance,because there is no substantive normative conflict between the two.Only by approaching from the practical perspective of how to apply the two norms can this intersectional problem of criminal and civil issues be effectively solved.The es-tablishment of apparent agency makes the elements such as the object of the act and the victim in the criminal facts more in line with other property-related criminal charges such as the crime of job embezzlement or the crime of misappropriation of funds.The same act cannot constitute contract fraud crime after apparent agency established.

关 键 词：合同诈骗罪 表见代理 实体法律关系 规范冲突否认 

分 类 号：D92[政治法律—法学]