论文部分内容阅读
在中国经济快速发展的情况下,侵犯财产权的案件已经是屡见不鲜了,而在众多的侵犯财产罪案件中,盗窃罪和职务侵占罪又有着极为相似的特征。在实践中针对保安盗窃驻勤单位财务的性质主要有两种观点:一是认为构成职务侵占罪。即保安利用当班之职务之便,将公司财务以盗窃的方式据为己有,构成职务侵占罪。二是认为构成盗窃罪。即保安是保安服务公司的员工,由保安服务公司负责其工作、工资问题,不是驻勤单位的员工,不存在职务之便之关系,所以其据为己有的不是本单位的财务,所以应当构成盗窃罪。本人认为保安构成盗窃罪。本文将从盗窃罪和职务侵占罪的构成、区别以及保安与驻勤单位之间的法律关系几个方面分别加以分析。
In the rapid economic development in China, cases of infringement of property rights have been uncommon, and in many cases of property crimes, theft and job embezzlement have very similar characteristics. In practice, there are mainly two kinds of views on the nature of the financial affairs of garrison units for security and theft: First, they consider that they constitute the crime of duty embezzlement. That is, the security guard takes advantage of the duties on duty and takes the company’s financial affairs as its own for theft, thus constituting the crime of duty embezzlement. Second, that constitutes a theft. Security guards are employees of security service companies. Security service companies are responsible for their work and wages. Employees who are not stationed personnel do not have any relationship to their jobs. Therefore, it is not the financial affairs of the unit that is based on their own interests. Therefore, Constitute theft. I think security guilty of theft. This article analyzes the constitution and difference of crime of theft and the crime of embezzlement and the legal relationship between the security and the service station respectively.