%0 Journal Article
%T 虚假诉讼罪法律适用与治理问题研究
Research on the Legal Application and Governance Issues of the Crime of Fraudulent Litigation
%A 黄湉
%J Open Journal of Legal Science
%P 7018-7024
%@ 2329-7379
%D 2024
%I Hans Publishing
%R 10.12677/ojls.2024.1212997
%X 《刑法修正案(九)》将虚假诉讼行为纳入刑法调整的范围，为规制虚假诉讼行为提供了有力支撑，并随着相关司法解释与意见的颁布，对虚假诉讼行为刑事规制范围进一步明确，但司法实践中仍存在对相关法律规定理解不一致，导致同案不同判的现象出现。争议主要集中在对“以捏造的事实”是什么事实的理解不清、对本罪的实行行为理解不同、对本罪中的“民事诉讼”界定不清以及对此罪第三款“择一重罪从重处罚”的争议等方面。通过对此罪名实施以来的案件进行分析，笔者认为，本罪实行行为应当是以捏造“无中生有”的事实并提起民事诉讼的行为，对于“民事诉讼”的理解不能过于机械，且此罪第三款规定的“其他犯罪”应当仅指侵财类犯罪，不宜作扩大解释。
The “Criminal Law Amendment (IX)” incorporates fraudulent litigation into the scope of criminal law, providing strong support for regulating such behaviors. With the issuance of related judicial interpretations and opinions, the criminal regulation of fraudulent litigation has been further clarified. However, inconsistencies in understanding the relevant legal provisions in judicial practice have led to different verdicts in similar cases. Disputes mainly focus on the unclear understanding of what constitutes “fabricated facts,” differing interpretations of the actus reus of this crime, ambiguous definitions of “civil litigation,” and debates regarding the stipulation in the third paragraph concerning “punishing one serious crime more severely.” Through an analysis of cases since the implementation of this crime, the author argues that the actus reus should involve the fabrication of “non-existent” facts and the initiation of civil litigation, and that the understanding of “civil litigation” should not be overly rigid. Additionally, the “other crimes” mentioned in the third paragraph should refer solely to property crimes and not be subject to broad interpretation.
%K 虚假诉讼，
%K 实行行为，
%K 法律适用
Fraudulent Litigation
%K Actus Reus
%K Legal Application
%U http://www.hanspub.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=102430