| 消费“维权过度”与敲诈勒索的比较研究 |
| Alternative Title | Comparative Study Between the “Protect Rights Excessively” of Consumption and the Racketeering
|
| 修真 |
| Subtype | 硕士
|
| Thesis Advisor | 贾登勋
|
| 2014-05-24
|
| Degree Grantor | 兰州大学
|
| Place of Conferral | 兰州
|
| Degree Name | 硕士
|
| Keyword | 消费
维权过度
敲诈勒索
比较研究
解决建议
|
| Abstract | 随着社会物质文化水平的提高，消费者自我保护意识不断增强，在产品质量问题发生纠纷时，频繁出现消费者在与商家就该损害赔偿协商未达到预期效果后，使用向媒体曝光等方式改变被动局面以期维护自己的合法权益权利甚至提出天价索赔的现象。在司法实践中，由于在我国刑法中有关敲诈勒索罪为简单罪状，规定不甚明确，且关于该罪也未出台相关的司法解释以明确其犯罪构成要件，认定主要依靠实务界和学界的解释。对此社会各界产生了极大的争议，需及时明确且有效的区分二者构成特点。
本文通过对最终认定为“维权过度”的黄静华硕维权案和最终认定为“敲诈勒索罪”而进行刑事追责的郭利奶粉维权案的研究，通过文献研究、定性分析、资料收集、对比分析等研究方法研究分析“维权过度”型敲诈勒索的行为特点，借此以论证“维权过度”与敲诈勒索罪的民刑领域的分界以及产生这类混淆问题的原因，同时借鉴域外相关先进理论为我国所用，力争寻求消费者在权利受到损害后积极有效的维权方法又可避免恶意维权而对商家损害，更好的建立消费者与经营者之间的和谐关系，也有助于解决个案处理的不平衡性，最终更好的实现公平正义、建立和谐社会。 |
| Other Abstract | With the improvement of the material and cultural level, and the enhancement of the self-protection awareness of consumer, when disputing the products quality, what frequently occurred is that, while the consumer does not reach the expected effect after consulting with the merchant for the damages, even put forward a claim for sky-high price. People have a great debate for this, and their features are needed to distinguish timely and definitely.
This paper studied the Asus rights case of Huang Jing which was judged as “Protect rights excessively” finally and the milk powder rights case of Guo Li which was judged as racketeering finally. The related advanced theories of foreign country were adopted to seek for the positive and effective methods when the rights of consumer were damaged, and it can also avoid the damage for the merchant because of the “Protect rights maliciously”, and establish the harmonious relationship between the consumer and the merchant. It is helpful to solve the unbalancedness of some cases, and realize the fairness and justice and the harmonious society finally. |
| URL | 查看原文
|
| Language | 中文
|
| Document Type | 学位论文
|
| Identifier | https://ir.lzu.edu.cn/handle/262010/202209
|
| Collection | 法学院
|
Recommended Citation
GB/T 7714 |
修真. 消费“维权过度”与敲诈勒索的比较研究[D]. 兰州. 兰州大学,2014.
|
Items in the repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
