论文部分内容阅读
纵观本案,本辩护人认为,贡某 的行为不构成犯罪。 一、贡某的的行为不构成贪污罪。 理由是贡某不符合贪污罪的主体资格。贪污罪的主体是特殊主体,贡某既不是国家工作人员,也不是受委托从事公务人员。刑法里这种受委托,可以是书面的,也可以是口头的,但必须是正式的、明确的。本案中贡某是村里的“横主儿”,村党支部和村委会对他是不信任的,但由于群众积极推荐他承揽打井工程,出于矛盾心理,便未表态,未表态既不肯定,也不否定。因此,不能把未表态作为口头委托的依据。没有受到委托,便不符合贪污罪的主体资格,其行为自然构不成贪污罪。
Throughout this case, the defender believes that Gong’s behavior does not constitute a crime. First, Gong’s behavior does not constitute a crime of corruption. The reason is tribute does not meet the main qualifications of corruption. The main body of corruption is a special subject, tribute is not a national staff, nor is it entrusted to civil servants. This kind of entrusted criminal law can be written or oral, but it must be formal and clear. In the present case, Gongmou is the “cross-Zhu Er” in the village. The village Party branch and the village committee do not trust him. However, since the masses actively recommended him to contract with the well drilling project, he was out of ambivalence and did not state his position. Not sure, nor denied. Therefore, you can not use your position as the basis for verbal trust. Without being entrusted, they will not meet the qualification of the main body of embezzlement, and their acts naturally will not constitute embezzlement.