论文部分内容阅读
法官在审理银行储户存款被盗取案件时,由于法律没有明确规定存款的法律性质即银行与客户关系的性质,加之对银行客户存款的所有权归属的规定也存在着模糊与矛盾,使得法官对相似存款被盗案件做出不同的判决。本文从立法、学理以及实际利益等方面思考,力求探讨存款的法律性质及其所有权归属,明确存款被盗取责任的认定问题。笔者偏向于将存款所有权的归属视为银行,由银行承担存款被盗取的相关法律责任,对客户的损失予以赔偿。
Judges in the trial of bank depositors stolen cases, because the law does not specify the legal nature of the deposit that the nature of the relationship between banks and customers, coupled with the deposit of bank customers ownership ownership provisions there are ambiguities and contradictions, making judges similar Deposits stolen cases make different judgments. This article from the legislative, theoretical and practical interests and other aspects of thinking, and strive to explore the legal nature of deposits and ownership of their ownership, a clear deposit stolen responsibility identified problems. The author prefers to regard the attribution of deposit ownership as a bank, and the bank shall bear the relevant legal liability for the deposit being stolen and compensate the client for losses.