论文部分内容阅读
《刑法》第91条第2款在界定公共财产时规定国家机关、国有企业和人民团体中管理或运输中的私人财产视为公共财产,但并未明确提及国有事业单位,导致司法实践中学校管理层以学校名义给老师发放晚自习津贴、生活补助、奖金的行为是否构成犯罪以及构成何罪的争议。从民法所有权角度、当然解释、扩张解释角度以及司法实践角度说明增加国有事业单位这一主体的合理性,建议增加国有事业单位,以消除今后司法实务中再次出现类似争议。
Article 91, paragraph 2, of the Criminal Law, when defining public property, stipulates that private property managed or transported by state organs, state-owned enterprises and mass organizations shall be treated as public property but the State-owned institutions are not explicitly mentioned, leading to the establishment of schools in judicial practice Management in the name of the school to the teacher issued a night study grants, subsistence allowances, bonus behavior constitutes a crime and constitute what crime controversy. From the point of view of civil law ownership, of course, from the point of view of expansion and interpretation and from the angle of judicial practice, it is justified to increase the main body of state-owned institutions, and it is suggested to increase state-owned units to eliminate similar disputes again in future judicial practice.