| （华南师范大学 法学院，广东 广州 510006） 摘 要：我国假球案以受贿定罪，遗漏了对假球行为的定性，形成“重反腐、轻打假”的错位；理论界对假球定性的探讨也缺乏说服力。域外司法不将假球认定为受贿罪，而均认定为诈骗罪，其经验值得借鉴。我国假球亦应定性为诈骗罪：参赛者未向组织者提供真实的比赛，获得“债务免除”利益；保护比赛是保护财产法益与保护体育诚信的完善契合；量刑时应考虑体育诚信的主观价值损失；不能以国家利益为借口打假球。因假球而受贿的，则触犯诈骗与受贿两罪名。 关 键 词：体育法；体育诚信；诈骗罪；财产法益；假球 中图分类号：G80-05 文献标志码：A 文章编号：1006-7116(2014)04-0037-05 |
PAN Xing-cheng，CHEN Qin
| （School of Law，South China Normal University，Guangzhou 510006，China) Abstract: In China, match-fixing cases are convicted of a bribe acceptance crime, while the determination of the nature of matching-fixing behaviors is omitted, which has formed such a wrong orientation as considering anti-corruption more important than anti-match-fixing; the academic community’s researches on the determination of the nature of matching-fixing are not convincing as well. In jurisdictions abroad, matching-fixing is not convicted of a bribe acceptance crime, but convicted of a fraud crime; their experiences are worthy of our reference. In China, the nature of match-fixing should be determined as a fraud crime: a player fails to provide the organizer with a real competition and gets the interest of “debt exemption”; competition protection is the perfect fusion of property inter-est protection and sports honesty protection; the loss of subjective value of sports honesty should be considered during conviction; national interest shall not be used as an excuse for matching fixing. People who accept a bribe as a result of match-fixing will be guilty of both fraud and bribe acceptance crimes. |
下载本期全文：点击下载