场外配资的刑法介入:立场、根据与限度  

The Involvement of Criminal Law in OTC Financing:Justification,Basis and Limits

作　　者：马文博 MA Wenbo(Law School,Renmin University of China,Beijing 100872,China)

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院,北京100872

出　　处：《现代法学》2025年第2期34-48,共15页Modern Law Science

基　　金：国家社科基金重大项目“防范系统性风险与健全金融稳定长效法律机制研究”(23&ZD158)。

摘　　要：随着场外配资涉刑案件不断涌现,刑法介入其中的正当性与合理限度亟待理论说明。从金融监管角度看,场外配资由于未满足特许要求而被否定,但该评价的后果论证并不充分。场外配资屡禁不止的现状及由此产生的诉争,促成纠纷解决视角下区分效力与履行以平衡风险分配的临时解决方案,但该方案缺乏对规范定性的完整阐释。立足防范化解系统性金融风险的基本立场,前置法上的不同评价与处置方案能够得到融贯诠释,进而为刑法规制场外配资奠定基础。行为违反融资融券专营制度是刑法介入场外配资的形式根据,其不法实质是规避金融监管而必然缺乏稳定的风险识别、处置架构所导致的风险错配。控制证券账户以实现约定情形下的平仓清算与否,并不影响对场外配资是否构成非法经营罪的判断,这种判断应聚焦于行为人是否把出资方主动投资的损失风险置换为借助用资方被动获利,并通过附条件的证券赎回机制,将出资方名下资产可能因市场波动的损失控制在用资方保证金一定比例的范围内。在行为人既是配资方也是出资方的场合,由于难以认定行为人能够合乎规范地认识自己系通过从事非法证券业务获利,所以应阻却刑法归责。With the continuous emergence of criminal cases involving OTC financing,the justification and reasonable limits of criminal law's intervention therein require urgent theoretical clarification.From the perspective of financial regulation,OTC financing is negated due to its failure to meet licensing requirements,but the consequential justification for this evaluation is not sufficient.The repeatedly prohibited but not stopped status of OTC financing and the disputes arising therefrom have led to temporary solutions from the perspective of dispute resolution,which seek to balance risk allocation by distinguishing between validity and performance,but this solution lacks a complete explanation of the normative characterization.Based on the fundamental stance of preventing and resolving systemic financial risks,the different evaluations and disposal schemes in antecedent law can obtain a coherent interpretation,thereby laying the foundation for criminal law' s regulation of OTC financing.The violation of the exclusive franchise system for margin trading is the formal basis for criminal law's intervention in OTC financing;its substantive illegality is the risk mismatch caused by the evasion of financial regulation and the inevitable lack of a stable risk identification and disposal framework.Whether or not the securities account is controlled to achieve agreed-upon forced liquidation does not affect the determination of whether OTC financing constitutes the crime of illegal business operation;this determination should focus on whether the actor has replaced the investment loss risk voluntarily borne by the fund provider with the passive profit obtained by the fund user,and through a conditional securities repurchase mechanism,controls the potential loss of the fund provider's assets due to market fluctuations within a certain proportion of the fund user's margin.In circumstances where the actor is both the financing provider and the fund provider,because it is difficult to determine that the actor can normatively recogn

关 键 词：场外配资 民行刑衔接 非法经营罪 证券犯罪 系统性金融风险 

分 类 号：DF623[政治法律—刑法学]