摘要
Abstract
利用合同实施诈骗的犯罪行为呈现上升的趋势，并且在涉诈骗类案件中，民事法律关系往往和刑事法律关系纠缠不清，在民事合同的效力状态的认定、民事责任以及程序适用方面，无论是在理论上还是在司法实践中均存在争议。有鉴于此，本文拟在民刑区分的理论下探寻涉诈骗类案件中民事合同应然的法律状态等其他民刑交叉问题，以期待对司法实践提供些许帮助。
Whereas the number of criminal cases of contract swindle increases, civil legal relationship and criminal legal relationship are entangled in swindle cases, and disputes exist in theories and juridical practices from the point of confirmation of the validity state of civil contracts, civil liability and procedural application, this paper studies the ought-to-be legal status and other problems related to the intersection of civil law and criminal law existing in swindle cases through the theory of distinguishment of civil law and criminal law with the expectation to facilitate juridical practices.
除绪论外，本文包括四个部分。第一部分主要论述判断涉诈骗类案件中民事合同效力的法律漏洞以及裁判纠纷，以及学理上探寻该种行为适用规范的尝试。现行民事法律体系并没有提供直接调整涉诈骗类案件中合同效力的规范，并且该类案件并不属于法律不拟调整的“法外空间”与不属于立法者“有意义的沉默”，故而于此存在法律漏洞，规范的缺失导致了司法实践的混乱，关于涉诈骗案件中民事合同的效力的认定存在两种不同的判决结果和十余种判决理由。通过文献的梳理发现国内理论界对于此问题争议的核心在于对公、私法区分理论缺乏深入了解，继而在判断合同效力时存在争议，主要是因为此类案件涉及到公法因素，所以在判断合同效力时也存在绝对无效、绝对有效、可撤销等观点。
In addition to the introduction, this paper has been divided into four parts. The author discusses legal loopholes and judgment disputes of civil contract validity existing in swindle cases and attempts to theoretically explore the applicable specification in the first part. Existing civil law system does not stipulate positive governing for the contract validity of swindle cases, and such cases are neither “extralegal spaces” not to be adjusted by law nor the legislator’s “meaningful silence”, thus, legal loopholes hereof exist and the missing of stipulations results in the confusion of juridical practices. The confirmation for civil contract validity of swindle cases is provided with two results of judgment and more than ten reasons for judgment. References show that the core of relevant disputes is lacking in in-depth knowledge of theories of distinguishment of public law and private law in the domestic theoretical cycle, and disputes about the judgment of contract validity are thus generated. Absolute nullity, absolute validity, revocability and other viewpoints are presented in the judge process of contract validity mainly because such cases are involved in public law.
第二部分主要对涉诈骗案件中合同效力现有观点进行批判。首先阐述民刑区分理论，为论证此案件中合同的效力状态当属无效奠定理论基础。其次，从此案件中合同没有损害国家利益或公共利益、若将此类案件中合同效力定义为无效将损害担保制度以及从文义解释的角度判断此案件中合同的效力并不属于以合法形式掩盖非法目的三种情形对此案件中合同当属无效的观点进行批判。再次，以意思表示不真实为切入点，论述此案件中合同并不符合合同有效的构成要件，故对实践中认为此案件中合同绝对有效的观点进行批判。
Second, the author focuses on criticizing existing comments on contract validity of swindle cases. First, theories of distinguishment of civil law and criminal law are stated, which lays a theoretical basis for proving validity and status of contract to be invalid. Then, a judgment is drawn that the contract validity of this case does not belong to three situations of covering illegal purposes in legal forms and the comment on invalidity of contract is criticized in the perspective that contracts of this case cause no damages to national benefit or public benefit and will cause damages to the guarantee system in the event that the validity of contract is defined as invalid, and in the perspective of semantic interpretation. Finally, the author expounds the contrast of this case does not conform to valid constitutive requirements of contract from the point of intention mispresentation and criticizes the comment on absolute validity of contract obtained from practices.
第三部分主要论述影响合同效力的理论根据，为本文提出关于合同效力的观点奠定基础。此类案件中涉及民事和刑事两种法律关系，只有了解判断合同效力的理论根据，才能在两种复杂的法律关系中抽丝剥茧找到此案件中判断合同效力状态的实质性因素。首先从影响合同效力的理论基础和实质性因素两个角度进行阐述，得出合同效力的判断其实就是意思自治与政府管制之间的矛盾这样的结论。另外，判断合同效力时还必须考虑当事人意思表示的品质以及法律规范对意思自治的评价等因素。
Third, the author discusses theoretical effects upon the validity of contract, which lays the foundation for comments on the validity of contract. This case is involved in civil law and criminal law, substantial factors can be obtained from two complicated legal relationships only through theoretical reasons for the judgment of contract validity. On one hand, the author draws a conclusion that the judgment of contract validity equals to the conflict between autonomy of will and government regulation through delivering theoretical basis and substantial factors of contract validity. On the other hand, the quality of intention presentation of the party involved, legal evaluation of autonomy of will and other factors should be taken into account in the judge process of contract validity.
第四部分定义涉诈骗案件中民事合同效力的应然状态及私法效果。要准确地判断此案件中合同效力的应然状态，除了理解影响合同效力理论根据以外，还要辨析两组意义相近的概念：欺诈和诈骗、民事欺诈和刑事诈骗。根据影响合同效力的实质性因素来判断合同效力的前提是已经判断该行为属于民事行为，而只有清楚地辨析欺诈和诈骗、民事欺诈和刑事欺诈这两组概念才能对民事行为和刑事行为加以区分。最终，将此类案件中民事合同的效力定义为可撤销的合同。随着合同效力的确定，合同行为在民法上产生的私法效果也就应运而生。故而紧接着又论述了此类案件中合同在民法上产生的法律效果，受诈骗人对权力的救济。
Last but not the least, the ought-to-be state of civil contract validity of swindle cases and the effect of private law are defined. Except for the understanding of theoretical basis for contract validity, the ought-to-be state of contract validity should be accurately judged through discriminating the two similar concepts: fraud and swindle, civil swindle and criminal swindle. The validity of contract is judged according to substantial influence factors on condition that it has been proved to be a civil act, civil act and criminal act can be distinguished only through clearly discriminating the above two concepts. Finally, the validity of civil contract of such cases is defined as revocable. The effect of private law of contractual behaviors in civil law is generated from the confirmation of contract validity. Therefore, the legal effect of contract of such cases in civil law is determined by the swindler’s authority relief.
关键词： 欺诈；刑民交叉；刑民区分；可撤销合同；民事责任
Keywords: swindle; intersection of civil law and criminal law; distinguishment of civil law and criminal law; revocable contract; civil liability