江汉学术 ›› 2017, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (1): 19-26.doi: 10.16388/j.cnki.cn42-1843/c.2017.01.003

• 法 律 • 上一篇    下一篇

“收受财物后及时退还” 的刑法教义分析

孙道萃   

  1. 北京师范大学 刑事法律科学研究院,北京 100875
  • 收稿日期:2017-01-19 修回日期:2017-01-19 出版日期:2017-02-15 发布日期:2017-01-17
  • 作者简介:孙道萃, 男, 江西泰和人, 北京师范大学刑事法律科学研究院博士后。
  • 基金资助:
    最高人民检察院理论研究所课题 “检察机关保障网络安全机制研究”(GJ2016D41); 广东省地方立法研究高校联盟青年立法资助项目 “广东省地方立法公众参与机制完善研究”

Doctrinal Analysis of“Prompt Refunding of Bribery”

SUN Daocui   

  1. Institute of Criminal Law Science,Beijing Normal University,Beijing 100875
  • Received:2017-01-19 Revised:2017-01-19 Online:2017-02-15 Published:2017-01-17

摘要: 面对收受财物后及时退还是否是受贿罪的司法难题, 目前有 “宽大处理” 和 “无罪” 两种司法模式。“无罪” 模式的合法性存疑, 但具有显著的政策有效性, 并且是有利于被告人的处置方案。“无罪” 模式与受贿罪的既遂理论相抵牾,“及时退还” 不属于既遂后的有效恢复或犯罪中止,“及时退还” 实质是缺乏受贿罪故意的无罪行为。收受财物后及时退还不完全等同于积极退赃, 及时退还仅适用于收受贿赂而不包括索贿情形; 及时退还的本质是无受贿罪故意,“及时” 强调退还的期限性、 主动性、 积极性与有效性。应通过刑法修正最终解决合法性问题。

关键词: 收受财物, 及时退还, 受贿罪, 刑事司法, 刑事立法

Abstract: It has been judicially dilemmatic how to treat the suspects who have promptly returned their bribery;in current practice,they have either received“lenient treatment”or are pronounced“not guilty”of criminal charges. While the“not guilty”treatment is legitimately doubtful,it has obvious policy effectiveness and is in favor of the accused. This treatment is in contradiction with the theory of accomplished crime as “prompt refunding” is not categorized as the effective recovery of an accomplished crime or the discontinuation of a crime. Prompt refunding only applies in the circumstance of accepting rather than requiring bribery,thus it is different from proactive surrendering ill-gotten gains. Its essence lies in the lack of intention to take bribery. The legitimacy of“prompt”refunding needs to be resolved through criminal law amendment to define the period of time and the proactive,positive,and effective nature of the action.

Key words: receiving property, prompt refunding, bribery crime, criminal justice, criminal legislation

中图分类号: