刑法占有概念的司法认定研究——以闫某盗窃案三级裁判为视角

Research on the Judicial Determination of the Concept of Possession in Criminal Law: From the Perspective of the Three-Tier Adjudication in Yan's Theft Case

This article examines the judgments from the first-instance, second-instance, and retrial proceedings in the theft case of Yan to identify the key contentious issues. Using the discrepancies in the rulings across the three court levels as a representative sample, it reflects on and analyzes the difficulties in defining the concept of possession in China’s criminal law within specific judicial practice. Focusing on these issues, the author employs empirical research methods to systematically outline the conflicts between the formal conception of possession and substantive review standards in individual cases: the first-instance court’s rigid application of the “physical control” standard led to sentencing imbalances; the second-instance court’s introduction of “general societal perception” as a factor resulted in judicial discrepancies; and the retrial court ultimately overturned the ruling by establishing a dual standard of “actual control + societal perception.” Building on this analysis, the article further proposes that the determination of secrecy should integrate the perpetrator’s subjective awareness with general societal perception, and that a presumption system for the purpose of illegal possession should be constructed based on “value quantification + evidence rules.” This system would incorporate presumption exclusion rules and a reverse burden of proof mechanism to achieve an organic unity of formal rationality and substantive justice in judicial standards. The retrial judgment in this case marks a shift in China’s judicial paradigm for property crimes from rigid adjudication to substantive review. The adjudicatory rules established therein serve as a significant reference for similar cases and provide a replicable and worthy judicial methodology for unifying the judicial standard of possession in China’s criminal law. This has considerable practical value for promoting the substantive unification of judicial standards in property crime cases in China.

本文通过梳理分析闫某盗窃案的一审、二审、再审的判决书，归纳本案争议焦点，以对照比较该案三级法院裁判差异为典型样本，深入反思和剖析我国刑法占有概念在具体司法实践中的认定困境。笔者针对焦点，通过实证研究方法，系统梳理形式占有观与实质审查标准在个案中的冲突表现：一审法院机械适用“物理控制”标准导致量刑失衡；二审法院引入“社会一般观念”要素导致裁判分歧；再审法院最终通过确立“实际控制+ 社会观念”的双重认定标准进行改判。在此基础上，进一步分析并提出：秘密性判断应结合行为人的主观认知与社会一般观念进行综合考量，并构建“价值量化+ 证据规则”的非法占有目的推定体系，通过设置推定排除规则和反向举证责任分配机制，实现裁判标准的形式理性与实质正义的有机统一。该案的再审判决标志着我国财产犯罪司法范式从机械司法向实质审查的转型，其确立的裁判规则对同质同类案件具有较高的示范效应，为统一我国刑法占有概念的司法认定标准提供了可复制、可借鉴的裁判方法论，对推动我国财产犯罪裁判标准的实质统一具有非常重要的实践价值。