合同诈骗罪中兜底条款解释规则的重构——以同质解释困境为切入点  

Reconstruction of Interpretation Rules of Catch-all Clauses in Contract Fraud Crime——With Homogenous Interpretation Dilemma as a Starting Point

作　　者：魏敖 范利君 WEI Ao;FAN Li-jun(The Eighth Prosecution Department of the First Branch,Beijing People’s Procuratorate of Beijing Municipality,Beijing 100040,China;School of Law,Beijing Institute of Technology,Beijing 102401,China)

机构地区：[1]北京市人民检察院第一分院第八检察部,北京100040 [2]北京理工大学法学院,北京102401

出　　处：《太原理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第6期37-44,共8页Journal of Taiyuan University of Technology(Social Science Edition)

摘　　要：《中华人民共和国刑法》第224条中兜底条款的设立具有实践意义,其能够有效规制法律文本无法预测的新型合同诈骗行为,缓和法律滞后性与经济发展多样性之间固有的矛盾。然而,于实践层面,兜底条款的适用范围呈现不当扩张的趋势。应当认为,上述问题的成因在于解释者对解释理念与解释规则的忽视。教义学语境下合理的进路,应是以限缩合同诈骗罪在实践中的入罪范围为目的,重视兜底条款的解释理念,实现对解释规则的反思性重构。在基本解释理念方面,应大体上遵循限制解释的理念,同时允许例外地扩张。具体而言,坚持以罪刑法定作为解释限度,同时坚持先例入罪的个别化解释态度。在具体的解释规则上,以同质解释作为一般规则,在此基础上,注重经济刑法的解释立场之特殊性,将合同诈骗的例示行为特征与规范保护目的作为判断基准,合理划定该罪兜底条款的规制范围。The catch-all clause in Article 224 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China has practical significance. It can effectively regulate the new types of contract fraud that cannot be predicted by the legal text, and ease the inherent contradiction between the legal lag and the diversity of economic development. However, at the practical level, the application scope of the catch-all clause shows a trend of improper expansion. It should be considered that the cause of the above-mentioned problems lies in the neglect of the interpretation concepts and interpretation rules by the interpreters. The reasonable approach in the context of dogmatics should be for the purpose of limiting the scope of contract fraud in practice, emphasizing the interpretation concept of the catch-all clause, and realizing a reflective reconstruction of the interpretation rules. In terms of basic interpretation principles, restrictive interpretation should be followed;meanwhile exceptional expansion should be allowed. Specifically, it is proposed to adhere to the principle of legality of crimes and punishments as the interpretation limit and the individualized interpretation attitude of criminalization based on precedents. In terms of specific interpretation rules, it is proposed to take homogeneous interpretation as the general rule, on this basis, to emphasize the particularity of the interpretation stance of economic criminal law, and with the example behavior characteristics of contract fraud and the purpose of normative protection as the judgment benchmarks, to reasonably delimit the regulation scope of the catch-all clause of the crime.

关 键 词：合同诈骗罪 兜底条款 同质解释 例示行为 目的解释 

分 类 号：D923[政治法律—民商法学]