【作者】 刘传华；

【导师】 谢勇；

【作者基本信息】 湘潭大学 ， 法律， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 侵占罪作为修订刑法典规定的一个新罪名，近年在理论界探讨较多。经过学者们的共同探索，有些问题已基本得到解决。但仍有些问题，至今在理论上及司法实践中存在争议而未得到合理的澄清。本文对侵占罪的若干争议问题进行了研析。文章认为，侵占行为就是行为人易“持有”为非法占有的行为。理论上普遍将侵占行为成立的前提限定为“合法持有”并不妥当。只有行为人将代为保管的他人财物占为己有，才能构成侵占行为。如果行为人并无意非法占有，只是越权擅自处理代为保管的他人财物，只是挪用或毁坏，则不是侵占行为；侵占罪之“拒不退还”或者“拒不交出”是侵占罪成立的情节要件而非侵占行为成立的要件，与侵占行为是并列关系而非包容关系。认定“拒不退还”或者“拒不交出”要件时，要求财物所有人或者有关机关首先必须提出交还请求，只有在财物所有人或者有关机关向侵占人提出交还请求的情况下，侵占人直接以语言或行为表明其“拒不退还”或者“拒不交出”意思时，才能认定该要件成立。“拒不退还”或者“拒不交出”的成立应有一个最终的时间限制。对于只采用自诉形式之侵占罪，应当于侵占人第一次以某种方式明确地向财物的所有人、占有人或者他们所委托的人表示其拒不退还或者拒不交出侵占物的意思时即已成立。行为人出于非法占有之目的已经处分了侵占物，在财物所有人要求退还或交出的情况下承诺给予等价补偿的，不能构成“拒不退还”或者“拒不交出”，即行为人不退还或交出的对象不限于原物；遗忘物与遗失物从内涵与外延上都不能等同。遗忘物是从遗失物中分离出来的概念，实际上属于非确定之遗失物。刑法只规定侵占非确定之遗失物即遗忘物的行为构成侵占罪，对于侵占遗失物即确定之遗失物的行为不能按侵占罪来处理；从犯罪即遂表现形式看，侵占罪是作为结果犯而非行为犯存在的。理论上存在未遂形态。但实践中其存在范围极其狭小。只有侵占行为人实际非法占有的财物未达到数额较大，而主观上企图侵占数额较大的财物且认为其非法占有的是数额<WP=13>较大的财物的情况下，才存在未遂形态。更多还原

【Abstract】 The Accusation of occupation as a new charge which is stipulated in the revised criminal legal code is heatedly discussed by experts who are enaged in legal field. After scholar’s study ,some problems have been solved, but other problems still remained which can’t be explained reasonably both in theory and in administration of justice practice. This paper analyses several controversy problems on the accusation of occupation. It believes that occupation demeanour is that a person who acts regards an "state `of occupation "as illegal occupation. It is generally believed that it is not appropriate to regard the premise of act of occupation as legal occupation. Only when the person who acts occupies other people’s property which is kept his act can be act of occupation if the person who acts has no intention of occupying other’s property, only deal with other’s property beyond his power or divert use or destroy,the act is not occupation "To reject to return"or "to reject to hand out ".others property is the necessary condition to constitute accusation of occuption,but it is not the necessary condition of non-occupation act .This relationship is putting side by side not included.To found the necessary condition of "rejecting to return "or"hand out",It is demanded that the owner of the property or the organs relative puts forward the request of returning. Only by then when a person who has occupied others property shows he rejects to return or to hand out can the case be constituted.To constitute the act of "rejecting to return or hand out"has a final time limit. As for the private prosecution form, the occupation has constituted after the person who occupies others property definitely shows to the owner of the<WP=15>property,occupation and commision that he will reject to return or hand out the property he has occupied. If the person who acts promises he will make up for the compensation after he has punished the occupation property with the intention of illegal occupation and the owner of the property asks to return or hand out,the charge of "rejecting to return or hand out "can’t be constituted,It means the articles which the conductors rejects to return or hand out is not sure to the original;The concept of articles which a person forgets to bring along can’t be equal to the one which a person loses both in connotation and in extension,The concept of the articles which a person forgets to bring along is separated from the concept of the articles which a person losts,In fact it belongs to indefinite articles.The criminal law only stipulates that the act to occupy indefinite lost articles,that is the act of forgotten articles,can constitute accusation of occupation.As for the act of occupying definite articles can’t be found accusation of occupationk.As for accomplished offence form,the accusation of occupation exists just as not accomplished offence.In theory it exists a state in which the crime has not finished.But in practice the range in existence is extremely narrow.The state of not accomplished offence only exists when the conductors occupies small amount of property in subjectivity with attempt to occupy large amount of propty and regards his illegal occupation as large amout.更多还原