電商海外代購(gòu)的刑法適用研究——以李某走私普通貨物案為例.pdf

1、1電商海外代購(gòu)的刑法適用研究——以李某走私普通貨物案為例內(nèi)容摘要自2007年我國(guó)進(jìn)口物品關(guān)稅稅率大幅調(diào)高以來(lái)，電商海外代購(gòu)的規(guī)模在我國(guó)日漸擴(kuò)大。而電子商務(wù)平臺(tái)在我國(guó)的迅猛發(fā)展，客觀上促進(jìn)了越來(lái)越多的淘寶商從事海外代購(gòu)服務(wù)。電商海外代購(gòu)一方面滿足了國(guó)內(nèi)很多人對(duì)于海外物美價(jià)廉商品的需求，也反過(guò)來(lái)促進(jìn)了電子商務(wù)的發(fā)展，繁榮了市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)；但另一方面，電商海外代購(gòu)卻規(guī)避了我國(guó)海關(guān)監(jiān)管相關(guān)法律法規(guī)中對(duì)其不利的規(guī)定。例如，通過(guò)常規(guī)報(bào)關(guān)渠道要繳納高額關(guān)稅

2、，但若走“無(wú)申報(bào)”通道入境則不必繳稅。此外，現(xiàn)有的海關(guān)監(jiān)管法律法規(guī)也沒(méi)有明確規(guī)定電商海外代購(gòu)行為屬于違法，因而，電商海外代購(gòu)在相當(dāng)長(zhǎng)一段時(shí)間內(nèi)處于法律監(jiān)管的灰色地帶，至于因網(wǎng)絡(luò)代購(gòu)而受《刑法》處罰的案件更是為數(shù)寥寥。本案作為電商海外代購(gòu)入刑公開(kāi)報(bào)道第一案，受到了社會(huì)各界的廣泛關(guān)注。法學(xué)理論界和實(shí)務(wù)界對(duì)如何處理該案有不同觀點(diǎn)，存在罪與非罪之爭(zhēng)，對(duì)其多次以走“無(wú)申報(bào)”通道方式入境在主觀上是否具有逃稅故意之爭(zhēng)，對(duì)其能否構(gòu)成走私普通貨物罪以及在

3、認(rèn)定李某境外代購(gòu)構(gòu)成走私普通貨物罪后量刑是否適當(dāng)之爭(zhēng)。由于本案是電商海外代購(gòu)入刑公開(kāi)報(bào)道第一案，對(duì)該案的處理牽涉到某些電商行為的罪與非罪問(wèn)題以及量刑輕重問(wèn)題，會(huì)影響電商海外代購(gòu)行業(yè)整體的發(fā)展。因此，對(duì)該案進(jìn)行刑法層面的探討，具有一定的理論和實(shí)務(wù)價(jià)值。除引言外，正文包括四部分：第一部分，案件的基本情況。本部分由以下幾個(gè)部分組成：第一，案由。第二，案情介紹。簡(jiǎn)要介紹了李某及同伙走私普通貨物罪的犯罪過(guò)程及法院的定罪量刑結(jié)果。第三，分歧意見(jiàn)。本

4、案的分歧主要集中在李某行為性質(zhì)、李某主觀上是否明知以及本案量刑適當(dāng)與否三個(gè)問(wèn)題上。第四，爭(zhēng)議焦點(diǎn)。通過(guò)對(duì)分歧意見(jiàn)的歸納，本案的分歧焦點(diǎn)漸次呈現(xiàn)：其一，電商海外代購(gòu)行為有無(wú)法律進(jìn)行規(guī)制。如果認(rèn)為李某從事的網(wǎng)絡(luò)境外代購(gòu)業(yè)務(wù)是互聯(lián)網(wǎng)時(shí)代電子商務(wù)的一種新樣態(tài)，那么就是完全正當(dāng)合法的；如果認(rèn)為李某網(wǎng)絡(luò)境外代購(gòu)行為已經(jīng)1AbstractSince2007onlineoverseaspurchasingagencyhasbeenwidenedwith

5、theincreasingrateofimpttariff.ThedevelopmentofEcommerceplatfminourcountrypromotesmemebusinessmenonTaobaotoengageinagentedinonlineoverseaspurchasingagencyobjectively.OnlineoverseaspurchasingagencyononehmeetstheneedsofChin

6、eseontheotherhitpromotesthedevelopmentofEcommerceplatfm.Fexamplegongreptingchannelneedshighimpttaxbutgoingnoreptingchannelneednotpayingtariff.Besidestheregulatinglawfitisinsufficientfalongtime.Asaresultthereisahfulofcrim

7、inalcasesonit.Thiscaseasthefirstreptedcriminalcaseofonlineoverseaspurchasingagencyhasbeenwidespreadconcernedinourcountry.Legaltheypracticeonhowtodealwiththecasehavedifferentpointsonit.Crimenocrimetheexistenceofcriminalin

8、tentofsmugglingtaxwhenLeego“noreptingchannel“aswellasthemeasurementofpunishmentisappropriatenotafterLee’sconstitutingSmugglingCommonGoods.Asthefirstreptedcriminalcaseofonlineoverseaspurchasingagencythedisputeofthiscaseco

9、ncernsthelegalnaturecriminalsentencingofsomepeople’sbusinessonthisbehaviitalsoaffectsoveralldevelopmentofthisindustry.Therefetostudythecriminallawaspectsofthecasehassometheeticalpracticalvalue.Expectfwardthemainbodyinclu

10、desfourparts:Thefirstpartisthebasiccircumstancesofthecase.Thispartincludes:thefirstisbriefsummary.Thesecondisthattheintroduceofthecase——givingabriefintroductionoftheprocessofLeeheraccomplicehowtosmuggletariffthejudgmento

11、fcourt.Thethirdisthatthefocuseddisagreementsdisputesofthecase.Byinducingdisagreementthecasepresentsthedifferentfocusesgradually:oneofitisthenatureofLee’sbehavi.IfyouthinkthatLeeengagedinagentedpurchasingabroadonlineisane