【作者】 赵倩；

【导师】 王丽华；

【作者基本信息】 河北师范大学 ， 刑法学， 2024， 硕士

【摘要】 在全球化与信息化的浪潮中,洗钱犯罪日益呈现出复杂化、隐蔽化的特点,其中自洗钱犯罪更是成为洗钱活动的新趋势,严重威胁了我国的金融秩序和社会稳定。《刑法修正案(十一)》适时将自洗钱行为纳入洗钱罪的法定范畴,形成了自洗钱与他洗钱并存的治理模式。这一变革对于保障我国经济体系的安全,乃至维系全球经济政治安全秩序,具有极其关键的意义。为准确理解和适用法条,本文对洗钱罪的理论争议和司法实践中的疑难问题进行探讨。本文共分为四个部分。第一部分是自洗钱行为的界定及其入罪分析。在探究洗钱罪本质的基础上,明确界定了自洗钱行为的概念,即行为人在实施毒品犯罪、走私犯罪、贪污贿赂犯罪等七种上游犯罪之后,对犯罪所得及其产生的收益进行“清洗”以使之合法化的行为。自洗钱行为独立成罪是我国法制建设与时俱进、强化反洗钱举措的必然产物,也是我国顺应国际反洗钱合作潮流、对接全球立法趋势的重要标志。随后,从事后不可罚行为、期待可能性理论、吸收犯理论以及牵连犯理论等多个维度,系统论证自洗钱独立入罪的法理基础和实践合理性。第二部分重新审视和认定自洗钱入罪后洗钱罪的构成要件。在客体方面,综合考虑多种法学理论以及修法初衷、刑法体系等因素,可以确定洗钱罪的客体为国家金融管理秩序。在客观方面,指出“提供资金帐户”行为不应当单独认定为洗钱罪,同时对新修的“支付结算方式”、“跨境转让资产”等行为进行详细论述。在主体方面,特别强调应结合共犯的相关理论来认定洗钱罪的责任主体。在主观方面,指出即使删除“明知”要件,洗钱罪仍被明确规定为故意犯罪,既包括直接故意也包含间接故意,但排除过失犯的情形。第三部分集中探讨了自洗钱行为在被纳入刑法罪名体系后,司法适用中产生的两个问题。一是自洗钱犯罪与上游犯罪的竞合适用困境,即在自洗钱行为与上游犯罪行为发生竞合时,如何确定两者的法律关系,进而决定应按数罪并罚原则处理或采取其他刑罚裁量方式。二是共犯主观故意认定与行为辨析困难,涉案行为的隐蔽性、复杂性及嫌疑人间的秘密沟通增加了认定难度;而自洗钱行为与合法经济活动的混淆、涉案人员角色的多样性及行为模式的交织,也使得行为辨析变得复杂。第四部分对自洗钱入罪后司法实践中暴露出来的核心难点问题,探寻适宜的解决方案。针对自洗钱犯罪与上游犯罪的竞合适用困境,应依据罪数理论及相关原则进行全面衡量,以犯罪所得产生时点与掩饰、隐瞒手段归属作综合判断,若掩饰、隐瞒与自洗钱行为同时是上游犯罪的组成部分,择一重罪处罚;若自洗钱行为与上游犯罪相互独立,则数罪并罚。针对自洗钱犯罪共犯认定困境,本文提倡采纳“共犯共谋说”,立足“事前通谋”认定洗钱行为者与上游犯罪者共犯关系。本文建议将“事前通谋”的时间范围拓展至上游犯罪结果产生前全程,重视犯罪行为的连续性和复杂性,承认在上游犯罪进程中形成的承继性共谋。对于通谋内容,主张无需过分细化,关键在于行为人明知正犯犯罪意图,明示、暗示或默契配合均体现共犯意志。依据行为人之间的“通谋”内容认定自洗钱的共同犯罪问题,涉及上游犯罪预谋与洗钱行为策划者,应视为正犯;非全程通谋者,需综合考量认知深度、参与度及主观故意;既遂后追认者,以认知程度、接受与执行情况为认定标准。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the wave of globalization and informatization,money laundering crimes are becoming increasingly complex and covert.Among them,self money laundering crimes have become a new trend in money laundering activities,causing serious impacts on China’s financial order and social stability.The Eleventh Amendment to the Criminal Law timely incorporates self money laundering behavior into the statutory scope of money laundering crimes,forming a governance model of coexistence of self money laundering and other money laundering.This transformation is of crucial significance for ensuring the security of China’s economic system and even maintaining the global economic and political security order.To accurately understand and apply the legal provisions,this article explores the theoretical controversies and difficult issues in judicial practice of money laundering crimes.This article is divided into four parts.The first part is the definition of self money laundering behavior and its criminalization analysis.On the basis of exploring the essence of money laundering crime,the concept of self money laundering behavior is clearly defined,which refers to the act of the perpetrator "washing" the proceeds of the crime and the profits generated after committing seven upstream crimes,including drug crimes,smuggling crimes,and corruption and bribery crimes,in order to legalize them.The independent criminalization of self money laundering is an inevitable product of China’s legal construction keeping pace with the times and strengthening anti money laundering measures.It is also an important symbol of China’s compliance with the international trend of anti money laundering cooperation and integration with global legislative trends.Subsequently,the legal basis and practical rationality of the independent criminalization of self money laundering were systematically demonstrated from multiple dimensions,including the theory of non punishable behavior,the theory of expected possibility,the theory of absorptive offenses,and the theory of implicated offenses.The second part re examines and identifies the constituent elements of the crime of money laundering after it has been criminalized.In terms of the object,taking into account various legal theories,the original intention of amending the law,the criminal law system,and other factors,it can be determined that the object of money laundering is the national financial management order.Objectively speaking,it is pointed out that the act of providing a fund account should not be separately recognized as a money laundering crime.At the same time,a detailed discussion is given on the newly revised "payment settlement methods" and "cross-border transfer of assets".In terms of subjects,it is particularly emphasized that the relevant theories of accomplices should be combined to determine the responsible parties for money laundering crimes.In terms of subjectivity,it is pointed out that even if the "knowing" element is removed,the crime of money laundering is still clearly defined as intentional crime,including both direct and indirect intent,but excluding the situation of negligent offense.The third part focuses on exploring two issues that arise in the judicial application of self money laundering after it is included in the criminal law system.One is the dilemma of competing application between self money laundering and upstream crimes,that is,how to determine the legal relationship between self money laundering and upstream crimes when they compete,and then decide whether to deal with them according to the principle of combined punishment for multiple crimes or adopt other criminal discretion methods.Secondly,it is difficult to determine the subjective intent of accomplices and distinguish their behavior.The concealment,complexity,and secret communication between suspects in the case increase the difficulty of identification;The confusion between self money laundering behavior and legitimate economic activities,the diversity of roles and interweaving of behavior patterns among the involved individuals,also make behavior discrimination complex.The fourth part explores suitable solutions to the core difficulties exposed in judicial practice after the criminalization of self money laundering.In response to the dilemma of competing application between self money laundering crimes and upstream crimes,a comprehensive evaluation should be made based on the theory of crime quantity and relevant principles,and a comprehensive judgment should be made based on the time when the proceeds of crime are generated and the attribution of concealment and concealment methods.If concealment,concealment,and self money laundering behaviors are both components of upstream crimes,a heavier crime punishment should be chosen;If the act of self money laundering is independent of the upstream crime,multiple crimes will be punished together.In response to the dilemma of identifying accomplices in self money laundering crimes,this article advocates adopting the "theory of accomplice and conspiracy" and based on the "prior conspiracy" to determine the accomplice relationship between money laundering actors and upstream criminals.This article suggests expanding the time range of "prior collusion" to the entire process before the occurrence of upstream criminal results,emphasizing the continuity and complexity of criminal behavior,and acknowledging the inherited collusion formed in the upstream criminal process.For the content of collusion,it is advocated that there is no need for excessive refinement.The key is that the perpetrator clearly knows the intention of the perpetrator to express,imply,or cooperate tacitly,all of which reflect the will of the accomplice.Based on the content of "collusion" between the perpetrators,it is determined that the joint crime of self money laundering involves upstream criminal premeditation and money laundering planners,and should be regarded as a principal offender;Non complicit individuals need to comprehensively consider cognitive depth,participation,and subjective intention;For those who pursue recognition after completion,the criteria for recognition are cognitive level,acceptance,and execution.更多还原