硕士学位论文：论诉讼诈骗.doc

1、1硕士学位论文（20 届）论 诉 讼 诈 骗姓 名学 科 、 专 业 刑 法 学 （ 全 日 制 法 学 硕 士 ）研 究 方 向 经 济 刑 法指 导 教 师论文提交日期2论 诉 讼 诈 骗（硕士论文摘要） 改革开放后，随着我国的法治建设突飞猛进，人们的维权意识也逐步增强，越来越多的借助法律手段特别是诉讼手段来维护自身的合法权益。但是诉讼诈骗这一消极现象也日益突出，有关这方面案件的报道层出不穷，涉案金额越来越大，社会影响的恶劣程度也越来越严重。针对诉讼诈骗行为，司法实践中的处理方式并不统一，有以诈骗罪来认定的，也有仅按照妨害民事诉讼的行为进行处理。根据罪刑法定原则，在我国刑法中并无直接对应的

2、法律条文。刑法理论学界对该行为的性质认定和处理方式也没有达成统一的认识。本文旨在通过对诉讼诈骗行为的性质进行分析，并借鉴各国的处理经验，就其犯罪构成以及相关问题提出自己的看法，以期对立法和司法实践提出建议和理论支持。全文共约 42500 字，其中包括脚注约 3000 字。本文共分为四部分：第一部分为诉讼诈骗概述。首先界定本文的研究范围是发生在民事诉讼过程中的利用虚假的证据欺骗法院的行为，通过对学界存在的概念进行分析得出本人的结论，即以提起民事诉讼为形式、以获取他人的财物或者财产性利益为目的，利用虚假证据骗取法院裁判的行为，之后与相关概念做了区分辨析。第二部分为域外诉讼诈骗立法的比较研究。主要以

3、我国台湾地区、日本、西班牙、意大利和新加坡等国的刑法规定得出这些国家将诉讼诈骗行为入罪的理由，并分析了英美等国的民事法律规制方法。第三部分为我国刑法学界有关诉讼诈骗的定性之争及评述。我国刑法学界有少数学者认为诉讼诈骗行为无罪，大部分学者持有罪论观点，但并没有达成统一认识，有诈骗罪说、敲诈勒索罪说、伪证罪说及设立新罪说等。笔者通过一一驳斥得出结论即赞成设立新罪说。第四部分为我国用刑法规制诉讼诈骗行为的必要性。先从将诉讼诈骗入罪的正面支持角度分析了法理依据和伦理依据，然后从诉讼诈骗具有严重的社会危害性和具备刑事惩罚性的角度论证入罪的必要性。最后一部分是诉讼诈骗的刑事立法探索，笔者建议刑法增设民事诉

4、讼诈骗3罪，对犯罪构成和法定刑提出了自己的意见，并简要分析了罪与非罪、罪数形态和共犯形态等问题。关键词 诈骗 三角诈骗 诉讼诈骗1Issues on the Litigation Fraud(Abstract of Thesis for Master of Law)After the Reform and opening-up, the rule of law of our country has become increasingly accepted and advocated, and awareness of peoples rights are gradually enhancing

5、. More and more people are using legal means especially litigation to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests. However, the negative action of litigation fraud is also becoming more prominent. In this regard many cases are reported, some of which cases involve startling amount and occasion s

6、erious social influence. In view of this behavior, the disposals of litigation fraud in criminal practices differ from one to another. According to the principle of Legality, no direct corresponding provision in currently applicable Criminal Law of the P.R.C. can be applied to. Theory of criminal la

7、w scholars hasnt form a consistent and uniform understanding yet. Accordingly, this paper is determined to analysis the nature of litigation fraud and learns from the experience of other countries to deal with the same action. By presenting the authors own opinion with respect to the constitution of

8、 crime and other related issues, she hopes to make recommendations and theoretical support to the legislative and judicial practices. The full text of a total of about 42,500 words, in which footnotes amounts to 3,000 words approximately.The full text is divided into five parts:Section One: overview

9、 of litigation fraud. In the beginning, the author define the scope of this study are actions occurred in civil litigation process in using false evidence to deceive the court. After analyzing different concepts the author comes to her own conclusion that the litigation fraud is a kind of conduct to

10、 illegally possess other peoples property. The conductor purposefully misleads judge to conclude an incorrect false judgment which will unjustly enrich the conductor by enforcing sufferers property of property-like interest to be defrayed to the conductor or a third party through means of deliver fo

11、rged evidences. After that the author differ this concept to related concepts to make the distinction.Section Two: comparative study of legislation of litigation fraud. First the author 2compares the criminal legislation of different countries and regions such as Japan, Spain, Italy, Singapore and T

12、aiwan province and comes to the reasons why these countries and regions convicted the litigation fraud. Then the author analyzes the United States and British civil law methods.Section Three: identification litigation fraud both in theory and practice. In this part, four major standpoints among our

13、legal theorists are stated, which include specifically innocence of litigation fraud, guilty of litigation fraud, as well as improvement of provisions concerning litigation fraud. The author concludes her opinion of in favor of the creation of new crime by rejected the other theories one by one.Sect

14、ion Four: neediness of our country to regulate litigation fraud using criminal law. The author agrees to use criminal law to regulate litigation fraud, and analyzes the jurisprudence bases and ethics bases. Then the author analyzes the grave social harm of litigation fraud from the perspective of ch

15、aracteristics of crime.The last part is the exploration of criminal legislation of litigation fraud. The author recommends increasing the establishment of the crime of civil litigation fraud and presents her own opinions of the constitution of crime and the penalty. Then many other questions, includ

16、ing attempt of crime, sum of crime, and concurrent crime are briefly discussed.Keywords: Crime of Swindling Three-angled Swindling Litigation Fraud1目 录导言第一章 诉讼诈骗概述 .2第一节 诉讼诈骗的范围界定和概念综述 .2一、诉讼诈骗概念综述 .2二、本文的研究范围界定 .6第二节 诉讼诈骗与其他相关概念辨析 .7一、诉讼诈骗与恶意诉讼 .7二、诉讼诈骗与滥用诉权 .8三、诉讼诈骗与诉讼欺诈（诈欺） .8第三节 我国有关诉讼诈骗的立法现状 .9

17、一、民事诉讼法的规定 .9二、民法上的规定 .10三、刑法上的规定 .10第二章 域外诉讼诈骗立法比较研究 .11第一节 诉讼诈骗的刑事立法规制 .12一、诉讼诈骗构成诈骗罪 .12二、诉讼诈骗构成其他犯罪 .13三、支持诉讼诈骗入罪的国家所持理由 .15第二节 诉讼诈骗的其他法律规制 .18一、民事诉讼法中规定高额罚金 .182二、侵权行为法中规定惩罚性赔偿 .19第三章 我国刑法学界有关诉讼诈骗的定性之争及评述 .21第一节 诉讼诈骗有罪论及评述 .21一、诉讼诈骗构成诈骗罪说及评述 .21二、诉讼诈骗构成敲诈勒索罪说及评述 .24三、诉讼诈骗构成伪证罪说及评述 .25四、设立新罪说 .2

18、6第二节 诉讼诈骗无罪论及评述 .27一、诉讼诈骗无罪论 .27二、对诉讼诈骗无罪论的评述 .28第四章 我国用刑法规制诉讼诈骗行为的必要性 .29第一节 诉讼诈骗入罪的正面支持 .29一、诉讼诈骗入罪的法理支持 .29二、诉讼诈骗入罪的伦理支持 .32第二节 诉讼诈骗行为符合犯罪的特征 .34一、诉讼诈骗的社会危害性分析 .35二、诉讼诈骗的刑事可罚性分析 .37第五章 诉讼诈骗的刑事立法探索 .38第一节 民事诉讼诈骗罪的立法设计 .38一、罪名选择和罪状设计 .38二、民事诉讼诈骗罪的体系归属 .39三、民事诉讼诈骗罪的构成要件分析 .403第二节 法条表述及法定刑配置 .41一、法条表述 .41二、法定刑配置依据 .41第三节 民事诉讼诈骗罪的犯罪形态分析 .43一、犯罪既遂的认定 .43二、罪数认定 .44三、共犯认定 .44结语 .45