诉讼诈骗的刑法规制-法学专业毕业论文.pdfVIP

摘要 摘 要 本文从司法实践的三个案例出发，引出了目前社会上存在对诉讼诈骗行为定 性不一的现象。对诉讼诈骗的概念、类型、定性纷争、定性上存在的一些问题及 国外在诉讼诈骗上的立法进行了概述，并重点解决了两个问题，一是诉讼诈骗的 定性问题，从犯罪构成、司法实践、诉讼诈骗定性为诈骗罪的合理性及对于较难 定性的几种相似行为的分析中得出诉讼诈骗应当定性为诈骗罪。其中在分析将诉 讼诈骗定性为诈骗罪的合理性所在时，从诉讼诈骗中被骗人与被害人并非同一 人、被害人是在法院强制执行时没有选择的被迫交出财物、诉讼诈骗的客体与诈 骗罪的客体不完全一致、对于《答复》中指出的诉讼诈骗行为不宜以诈骗罪追究 行为人刑事责任的问题四个方面来分析。二是完善诉讼诈骗刑法规制的措施，即 通过对刑法266 条的解读及相关部门尽快出台相应的司法解释来给予具体规定， 希望通过这些方式来解决当前诉讼诈骗定性上的分歧。 关键词：诉讼诈骗；定性纷争；定性分析；完善；司法规制 III 万方数据 Abstract ABSTRACT In this paper, starting from the three cases of judicial practice, The author raises the social existence of litigation fraud on different qualitative phenomenon.The concept , types of litigation fraud, qualitative disputes, some problems on the qualitative and foreign legislation on litigation fraud were summarized, and the key to solve the two problems, one is the qualitative problem of litigation fraud, from the crime constitution, the judicial practice, litigation fraud as the rationality of the crime of fraud and for difficult to qualitative analysis of several similar behavior of litigation fraud shall be as a fraud. Which based on the analysis of the actions to be qualitative for the rationality of the crime of fraud, fraud is deceptive and the victim from the litigation fraud is not the same person ,the victim have to hand over the property in the court for compulsory execution, the object of litigation fraud is not in conformity with