碰瓷论文“碰瓷”行为的刑法定性.docVIP

碰瓷论文：“碰瓷”行为的刑法定性 【中文摘要】随着社会的高速发展,“碰瓷”行为正以其强大的破坏力及社会危害性吸引了越来越多人的关注。“碰瓷”犯罪的社会危害性极大,应当将其纳入刑法的视野予以谴责和非难。然而,学界对“碰瓷”行为的刑法定性问题却长期存在着争议,究竟应当以何种罪名予以认定在司法实践中众说纷纭。笔者认为,对“碰瓷”案件的刑法定性问题不能一刀切,而应具体情况具体分析。一般认为,要从行为发生的时间、地点、路段、路况、行为人的主观故意、客观造成的后果等方面来综合判断。如果行为人采用了威胁、恐吓等手段来逼迫被害人交付财物,则应根据其严重程度认定为敲诈勒索罪或抢劫罪；如果行为人采用了虚构事实、隐瞒真相的方式使得被害人基于错误认识而处分财物,则应认定为诈骗罪；如果行为人的“碰瓷”行为足以危害公共安全,致使其他不特定多数人的合法权益处于随时可能受到侵害的危险状态中,由于此时其手段行为(碰瓷行为)与行为(获得财物)存在牵连关系,则应当依照牵连犯从一重处的原则,认定为以危险方法危害公共安全罪。如此认定和处理不仅不违背刑法的罪刑法定原则,而且有利于打击违法犯罪行为,维护社会的和谐与稳定。 【英文摘要】With the rapid development of society, “touch porcelain” behavior with its strong destructive and social harm gets more and more people’s attention. The “Touch porcelain” social harm is great, shall be condemned and decried by the criminal law. However, circles on “touch porcelain” behavior about its criminal qualitative problem there are debated for a long time, and there are many kinds of voices about what charges it shall be recognized in the judicial practice. The author argues that the “touch porcelain” case of criminal qualitative problem cannot be one size fits all, but should particular case is particular analysis. Generally, it should be analyzed with the following factors:when, where, the road’s situation, the offender’s subjective intent, objective aspects of the consequences of an overall judgment. If the offender used threats and intimidation to persecute the victim means goods delivery, the case is identified as extortion sin or robbery according to its severity; If the offender used unreal facts, to hide the truth based on erroneous understanding and make the victim delivery property, the case shall be determined as a fraud; If the offender’s “touch porcelain” behavior enough to endangers public safety, causing other no specific most people’s legitimate rights and interests in danger of encroach on any possible state, it can be identified as the crime of endangering public security with dangerous