论文部分内容阅读
随着人们越来越关注公益事业,这其中的诈骗罪也越来越多。诈骗罪的构成要以财产损失的存在为前提。要成立财产损失就要对财产法益进行界定。学界关于财产法益有三种学说,分别是法律的财产说,经济的财产说以及作为折中说。其中折中说较为可取。但是就捐款、补助诈骗的案件而言,折中说未对使用经济财产的客观目的性加以确定,可能存在致使个案处理的模糊化并导致法益保护不确定性,也会违背事实判断先于价值判断的要求。而客观目的论的理论中,要是欺骗行为的客观目的无法实现,就可以认定为有财产损失的存在。起码在捐款、补助类诈骗案件中,客观目的论可以帮助折中说,使刑法客观主义的贯彻更加彻底。
As people pay more attention to public welfare, more and more frauds are involved. The constitution of fraud should be premised on the existence of property damage. To set up the property loss, we must define the law of property. There are three theories about the legal benefits of property in the academia, which are the legal property, the economic property and the compromise. Which compromise that is more desirable. However, in the case of donations and grants for fraud, the compromise does not establish the objective objective of using economic property. There may be ambiguities in the handling of cases and the protection of the interests of law and interests, as well as the judgment of fact before the value Judgment requirements. The theory of objective teleology, if the objective objective of fraud can not be achieved, you can be identified as the existence of property damage. At least in donations, subsidies and fraud cases, objective teleology can help compromise and make the implementation of criminal law objectivity more thorough.