【作者】 董斌；

【导师】 李兰英；

【作者基本信息】 厦门大学 ， 法律， 2009， 硕士

【摘要】 1997修订的刑法第388条规定:“国家工作人员利用本人职权或者地位形成的便利条件,通过其他国家工作人员职务上的行为,为请托人谋取不正当利益,索取请托人财物或者收受请托人财物的,以受贿论处。”此条在刑法理论界一般称为“斡旋受贿”或者“间接受贿”。我国斡旋受贿犯罪的立法,最早来源于两高关于执行《关于惩治贪污罪贿赂罪的补充规定》若干问题的解答,1997年修订刑法时,对解答内容予以吸收,并在修订后刑法第388条专门规定了斡旋受贿犯罪,将“利用本人职权或者地位形成的便利条件”与“为请托人谋取不正当利益”相联系,作为国家工作人员构成斡旋受贿犯罪的要件。但是,没有独立设立斡旋受贿罪,而是规定以受贿罪论处。从1997年修订刑法以来,在司法实践中,对于如何理解“利用本人职权或者地位形成的便利条件”和“不正当利益”等问题,分歧较大。2009年2月28日由第十一届全国人大会常务委员会第七次会议通过的《中华人民共和国刑法修正案(七)》(以下简称刑法修正案(七)),在刑法第三百八十八条后增加一条作为第三百八十八条之一,将国家工作人员的近亲属或者其他与该国家工作人员关系密切的人,以及离职的国家工作人员或者其近亲属以及其他与其关系密切的人,纳入斡旋受贿的主体范围。修正案进一步充实了斡旋受贿的规定,且非常明确的扩大了传统斡旋受贿犯罪的主体,非国家工作人员单独构成斡旋受贿犯罪已成为现实。本文结合笔者亲历的舒某受贿案件,探讨斡旋受贿犯罪的司法认定问题,同时就目前热点问题,如“利用本人职权或者地位形成的便利条件”、“不正当利益”、“关系密切人”、刑法修正案(七)第十三条的规定等问题进行深入探讨,并就《刑法修正案(七)》对斡旋受贿犯罪认定的影响以及规定的缺陷提出自己的看法。更多还原

【Abstract】 According to article 388 of Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China (1997 amendatory version), "any State functionary who, by taking advantage of his own functions and powers or position, secures illegitimate benefits for an entrusting person through another State functionary’s performance of his duties and extorts from the entrusting person or accepts the entrusting person’s money or property shall be regarded as guilty of acceptance of bribes and punished for it." This article also has been recognized as "mediation bribery" or "indirect bribery" in crime research. In our country legislation on mediation bribery was initially developed from "Some Notes on the Supplement of Bribery Punishment" jointly issued by the supreme people’s court and supreme people’s procuratorate, which then was included into the 1997 Criminal Law, in which article 388 specified the so-called mediation bribery, and together with "taking advantage of his own functions and powers or position", "securing illegitimate benefits for an entrusting person" has been acknowledged as two primary premise for conviction of bribery. However, in 1997 Criminal Law there is no independent crime for mediation bribery, which was instead classified and treated as general bribery. Therefore, since the 1997 Criminal Law, vast divergences, such as how to recognize "taking advantage of his own functions and powers or position" or "illegitimate benefits", have emerged in justice practice. And in the newly amendatory Criminal Law (version VII) passed at the seventh meeting of the Standing Committee of the Eleventh National People’s Congress on February 28, 2009, a supplement clause, which included close relatives or persons of State functionary and also those that resigned as prospective bribery subject, has been added to and greatly enhanced the original article 388 for mediation bribery. Thus, the scope of traditional subject of mediation bribery has been tremendously expanded in the new amendment, then non-state-functionary separately convicted for mediation bribery has been a common fact.In this paper, based on a bribery case of Mr. Su, which the author went through in person, we will inquire the judicial recognition of mediation bribery, and then discuss some latest hot issues, such as "taking advantage of his own functions and powers or position", "illegitimate benefits" and "close persons". In the end, we will fully examine article 13 in the amendment of Criminal Law (Version VII), and explore its impact on the recognition of mediation bribery and its possible defects.更多还原