文档介绍：中文摘要中文摘要账户实名人取走自己名下他人暂存存款是一种关涉到实际存款人、账户实名人、银行三方的侵犯财产类行为。由于我国刑事立法中,对于实名人这种取款行为没有明确规定,因此如何评价行为人取款行为的性质,引发司法实务界和理论界的广泛讨论。本文以晏某盗窃罪案为研究主线,针对理论界提出的无罪说、盗窃罪说、诈骗罪说和侵占罪说进行归纳评析,并对案件涉及到的相关理论问题进行研究。存款的占有和归属问题是对案件定性的切入点,刑法上存款合同的法律性质应该和民法保持一致,属于债权合同。在明确了存款合同法律性质的基础上, 对于存款的含义应该从存款现金和存款债权两个层次来理解,根据银行占有说的观点,存款债权属于账户实名人占有和所有,存款现金则归属于银行。根据我国关于侵财类犯罪的相关司法解释,并借鉴德日刑法的规定,对于存款债权这种财产性利益,应该属于刑法中的“财物”。在厘清这些理论问题的基础上,通过对盗窃罪(间接正犯)、诈骗罪、侵占罪这些传统罪名的区分,最终对晏某的行为定性为侵占,即实名人取走自己名下他人暂存款款的行为应定性为侵占行为,而不是盗窃行为。关键词:存款的占有;存款债权;财产陛利益万方数据黑龙江大学硕士学位论文 Abstract The account name removed hisname toothers is a kind oftemporary depos“ related to the depositor,account real celebrities,bank three party property violation thecriminal legislation of our country,for the realcelebrities such withdrawals behavior is not clearly defined,SO how to evaluate thepropeaies of withdrawal behavior,caused extensive discussion ofthejudicial practice is more thispaper,to study the main lineYan atheftcase,according tothe theory ofinnocence,theft,fraud and embezzlement said thatcarries on the induction analysis,theory research andthe case involved. Problems ofpossession and ownership ofdeposits isthestartingpoint onthe nature ofthecase,the criminal law on thelegal nature ofdeposit contract and civillaw should be consistent,which belongs tothe the basis ofthelegal nature ofdepos“contract,the depos“should be understood from themeaning ofthetwo levels ofcash on deposit anddeposit claims, according tothebank forthepossession ofdeposit creditpoint ofview,belongs tothe account realcelebrity possession and allcash,deposes belonging tothe tothe relevantjudicial usurpation ofcrime ofourcountry,and draw on theprovisions of criminal law,the depos“claims theproperty interests,should belong to”property in criminal law”.On the basis ofclarifying these theoretical problems,the crime oftheft (indirect),the distinction between fraud,embezzlement charges ofthese traditions,the qualitative b