本文選題：集資詐騙罪 + 犯罪主體　； 參考：《中南大學》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：集資詐騙罪的準確認定是司法難題之一。唐某集資詐騙案涉及四個爭議的焦點問題：一是犯罪主體的認定問題；二是主要罪名的認定問題；三是“非法占有故意”時間點的認定問題；四是犯罪數(shù)額的認定問題。唐某主觀上具有非法占有的目的,客觀上以公司名義進行非法集資并最終個人占有,成立集資詐騙罪。集資詐騙罪的非法占有目的應產(chǎn)生于行為前或行為中。行為人已支付的本金利息應在詐騙數(shù)額的認定中核減。法院已進行民事調解和民事判決的借款數(shù)額不應計入犯罪金額。唐某除成立集資詐騙罪外,還成立貸款詐騙罪和故意傷害罪,應以集資詐騙罪、貸款詐騙罪和故意傷害罪予以數(shù)罪并罰。
[Abstract]:The accurate identification of the crime of financing fraud is one of the judicial problems. Tangmou financing fraud case involves four controversial issues: first, the identification of the subject of the crime; second, the identification of the main charges; third, the "illegal possession intentional" of the time point of the problem; fourth, the identification of the amount of crime. Tang has the objective of illegal possession objectively in the name of the company to raise funds illegally and ultimately personal possession to establish the crime of fund-raising fraud. The purpose of illegal possession of the crime of fund-raising fraud should arise before or in the act. The principal interest paid by the perpetrator shall be reduced in the determination of the amount of fraud. The amount of money borrowed by the court for civil mediation and judgment shall not be included in the amount of the crime. Besides establishing the crime of raising funds, Tangmou also set up the crime of loan fraud and intentional injury, which should be punished in combination with the crime of financing fraud, the crime of loan fraud and the crime of intentional injury.
【學位授予單位】：中南大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D924.3;D920.5

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前2條

1 鐘瑞慶;;集資詐騙案件刑事管制的邏輯與現(xiàn)實——浙江東陽吳英集資詐騙案一審判決的法律分析[J];法治研究;2011年09期

2 崔楠;;集資詐騙罪“數(shù)額”的罪量刑量分析[J];中國檢察官;2010年12期

，

本文編號：1850335