【作者】 陈磊；

【导师】 刘健；

【作者基本信息】 湖南师范大学 ， 法律（专业学位）， 2015， 硕士

【摘要】 渎职犯罪是我国目前司法实践中较为常见的犯罪类型,其损害结果不仅会给国家、社会、人民造成经济、人身上的损害,也会造成严重的政治影响、恶劣的社会影响、社会不稳定、严重扰乱正常秩序、严重侵害公民权利等损害。前者是有形的可具体确定的损害结果,我们称之为“物质性损失”;后者是无形的、难以具体测量的损害结果,我们称之为“非物质性损失”。因非物质性损失的界定在实务操作中存在较多争议,给渎职犯罪办案人员带来不少操作困难,一直是司法理论和实务中比较关注的话题之一。从1300余例的法院判决来看,渎职案件中非物质性损失的认定比例远远低于物质性损失的认定,且常常依附于物质性损失的存在,很少有法院敢单独就非物质性损失这一损害结果认定犯罪,而且即使判决了,量刑也大大轻于造成物质性损失的渎职犯罪。另外,非物质性损失涵盖的范围虽然远远大于物质性损失,但在司法实践中,检法两家往往只局限于在少数领域尝试对非物质性损失的认定进行实践,未能进一步突破。从表面上看,是由于立法和评价机制缺失以及难于取证等问题阻碍了非物质性损失的有效认定,但深层次开看,主要还是由于非物质性损失本身的特点造成。非物质性损失的难以量化性和多样性造成了刑法和司法解释很难对此出台明确的标准加以规范;而非物质性损失评价机制的不确定性导致司法认定难以统一观点,不利于司法稳定。虽然对非物质性损失界定的实证性研究还比较匮乏,导致权力机关以及司法解释机关还迟迟没有出台成型的具有普遍操作性的权威性规定可供执行,但是只要渎职行为造成的非物质性损失达到了同等于物质性损失的相当性程度,且造成非物质性损失的原因行为具有渎职犯罪上的可追责性,那么司法机关就应该在实践中努力尝试对非物质性损失进行量化处理,推动规范的量化性评价标准的建立。当然,非物质性损失的界定主要还是应当以加强立法或司法解释等方式作为解决法律适用问题的主要手段,尤其要注意细化评价标准、加强判例指导、证据固定和损失计算等相关辅助性工作,以期为进一步有效打击渎职犯罪提供刑法依据。更多还原

【Abstract】 Dereliction of duty crime is a common crime in our country, not only can cause economic loss and life injury, it can also cause serious political influence, social influence, social instability, serious damage to the normal order, serious violations of civil rights and other damage.The former is tangible and tangible damage results, we call it "material loss"; the latter is invisible, it is difficult to measure the damage results, we call it "non material loss".Because of the definition of non material loss, there are lots of disputes in the practical operation, which brings lots of difficulties to the investigation of the crime of dereliction of duty, and has been one of the most concerned topics in the judicial theory and practice.From more than 1300 cases, the proportion of non material loss is much lower than that of material loss, and often attached to the existence of material loss, few sentences dare to separate the material damage to the non material loss of this damage, and even if in the sentence, punishment is also much lighter than the material loss of dereliction of duty. In addition, the types of non material loss is much more than the material loss, but in the judicial practice, the procuratorate and the court is often limited to the identification of non material loss in a few areas, failed to further break.On the surface, it is due to the lack of legislation and evaluation system, and difficult to collect evidences and other issues have hindered the effective identification of non material loss, but the deep level, mainly due to the characteristics of non material loss itself.Although the empirical study on the non material loss definition is still relatively scarce, it leads to the lack of operability. However, if the result of non material loss is as serious as the material loss, and the cause of non material loss is the responsibility of the crime of dereliction of duty, the division of the law should try to quantify the non material loss, and promote the establishment of quantitative evaluation criteria.The key to the definition of non material loss lies on strengthening the legislative or judicial interpretation work and other issues as the main means, in particular, to pay attention to refining evaluation criteria, strengthen case guidance, evidence and loss calculation and other related work, in order to further effectively combat the crime of dereliction of duty.更多还原