首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      

关于许霆案的刑法分析
引用本文:李金明.关于许霆案的刑法分析[J].北京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2009,11(6):14-18.
作者姓名:李金明
作者单位:1.北京理工大学法学院, 北京 100081
摘    要:许霆利用银行自动柜员机出现故障的机会大肆超额取出现金的行为,不构成侵占罪,也不构成信用卡诈骗罪,而是构成盗窃罪。许霆在主观上具有非法占有的目的,在客观上实施了以平和方法将银行占有的资金转移为自己占有的行为。许霆的行为属于“盗窃金融机构,数额特别巨大的”情形。但由于银行方面的过错所产生的巨大金钱诱惑,期待许霆选择不超额提款的可能性降低。因此,许霆的主观恶性程度较一般盗窃行为更低。应根据刑法第63 条第2 款的规定,对许霆减轻处罚。

关 键 词:盗窃罪    盗窃金融机构    减轻处罚
收稿时间:2009/3/23 0:00:00

An Analysis of Xu Ting Case in the View of Criminal law
LI Jin-ming.An Analysis of Xu Ting Case in the View of Criminal law[J].Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology(Social Sciences Edition),2009,11(6):14-18.
Authors:LI Jin-ming
Institution:1.School of Law, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081
Abstract:Xu Ting's behavior that he use the banking failure of ATM to remove excessive cash wantonly does not constitute embezzlement, nor a credit card fraud, but a theft. Because, Xu Ting, subjectively with illegal possession of purpose, objectively transferred the bank funds to his own peacefully, his behavior is viewed as a phenomenon of "theft of financial institution and the amount especially greatly". But owing to the great temptation of money caused by the bank's fault, the possible anticipation of Xu Ting's choice to remove excessive cash is reduced greatly. Therefore, Xu Ting's subjective malignant degree is lower than average. According to paragraph 2, article 63 of the Criminal Law, punishment on Xu Ting should be mitigated. However, mitigation of punishment can only be made below the statutory minimum sentencing range, and should not mitigate willfully.
Keywords:crime of theft  theft of financial institution  mitigation of punishment  
本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录!
点击此处可从《北京理工大学学报(社会科学版)》浏览原始摘要信息
点击此处可从《北京理工大学学报(社会科学版)》下载免费的PDF全文
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号