約(yue)定(ding)(ding)受(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)，是(shi)指(zhi)國家工作人(ren)員利(li)用職務上的(de)便(bian)利(li)為請(qing)托人(ren)謀取(qu)利(li)益，約(yue)定(ding)(ding)收受(shou)(shou)(shou)或(huo)索取(qu)財物，但至案發并(bing)未實(shi)(shi)際(ji)占有(you)相關(guan)財物的(de)情形(xing)。約(yue)定(ding)(ding)受(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)不是(shi)一種法定(ding)(ding)的(de)受(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)類(lei)型，在我(wo)國刑法中(zhong)亦無(wu)明確規定(ding)(ding)，但實(shi)(shi)踐中(zhong)卻大量存(cun)在。根據約(yue)定(ding)(ding)受(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)人(ren)是(shi)否著(zhu)手實(shi)(shi)施受(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)行為及實(shi)(shi)際(ji)控(kong)制財物，可認定(ding)(ding)約(yue)定(ding)(ding)受(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)不成立犯罪(zui)、受(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)罪(zui)未遂或(huo)受(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)罪(zui)既遂。現(xian)結合實(shi)(shi)踐中(zhong)常見的(de)幾種約(yue)定(ding)(ding)受(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)情形(xing)，對(dui)如何準確認定(ding)(ding)其犯罪(zui)形(xing)態作簡要闡(chan)述(shu)。

　　單純達成行受賄合意的行為不是“著手”，不應對約定受賄人進行刑事處罰

　　一(yi)般(ban)認(ren)為(wei)(wei)，當行(xing)為(wei)(wei)產生了(le)侵害法(fa)益的(de)(de)具體(ti)危險時(shi)就是(shi)“著(zhu)手”。根據刑(xing)(xing)法(fa)理論，著(zhu)手是(shi)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)實(shi)(shi)行(xing)行(xing)為(wei)(wei)的(de)(de)起點，行(xing)為(wei)(wei)人(ren)著(zhu)手實(shi)(shi)施犯(fan)(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)之(zhi)后，就要承擔相應的(de)(de)刑(xing)(xing)事(shi)責任（未遂、中止(zhi)或既遂）。我國刑(xing)(xing)法(fa)雖然對犯(fan)(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)的(de)(de)預備(bei)、未遂和既遂形態均(jun)作出了(le)明確規定(ding)，并(bing)設(she)置(zhi)了(le)相應的(de)(de)處罰原則，但從實(shi)(shi)踐來看，不(bu)處罰預備(bei)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)(fan)已成為(wei)(wei)司法(fa)常(chang)態（單獨(du)將(jiang)預備(bei)行(xing)為(wei)(wei)規定(ding)為(wei)(wei)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)的(de)(de)除外），因此，著(zhu)手實(shi)(shi)際上是(shi)對行(xing)為(wei)(wei)人(ren)進(jin)行(xing)刑(xing)(xing)事(shi)處罰的(de)(de)界限，行(xing)為(wei)(wei)人(ren)在著(zhu)手實(shi)(shi)施犯(fan)(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)之(zhi)前，一(yi)般(ban)不(bu)認(ren)為(wei)(wei)是(shi)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)，不(bu)對其(qi)進(jin)行(xing)刑(xing)(xing)事(shi)處罰。

　　對于約定(ding)(ding)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)，實踐中常會遇到這種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)情(qing)形(xing)，即(ji)(ji)行賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)作出送錢的(de)(de)承諾(nuo)，受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)對承諾(nuo)表示(shi)認可(ke)(ke)，或者受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)主(zhu)動(dong)提出賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)賂的(de)(de)要(yao)求(qiu)，行賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)表示(shi)認可(ke)(ke)。對此(ci)，有(you)(you)學者認為(wei)只要(yao)行受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)雙方達(da)成行受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)的(de)(de)合(he)意(yi)(yi)，即(ji)(ji)便是(shi)(shi)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)沒有(you)(you)實際取得(de)財(cai)物，也表明公權(quan)力與財(cai)物之間具(ju)有(you)(you)交易(yi)的(de)(de)可(ke)(ke)能性，職務行為(wei)的(de)(de)廉潔(jie)性也存在被(bei)侵(qin)害的(de)(de)現(xian)實危(wei)(wei)險，因(yin)此(ci)，這種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)行為(wei)應被(bei)認定(ding)(ding)為(wei)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)的(de)(de)著手，應以受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)未遂進行處(chu)理(li)。筆者不(bu)贊成此(ci)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)觀點(dian)，理(li)由是(shi)(shi)，構(gou)(gou)成要(yao)件(jian)反(fan)映法(fa)益(yi)侵(qin)害，行為(wei)符合(he)構(gou)(gou)成要(yao)件(jian)即(ji)(ji)表明具(ju)有(you)(you)法(fa)益(yi)侵(qin)害性。同樣，判(pan)(pan)斷(duan)某行為(wei)是(shi)(shi)否具(ju)有(you)(you)侵(qin)害法(fa)益(yi)的(de)(de)危(wei)(wei)險，也要(yao)結合(he)具(ju)體犯(fan)罪(zui)的(de)(de)構(gou)(gou)成要(yao)件(jian)來看。對受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)而言，其構(gou)(gou)成要(yao)件(jian)主(zhu)要(yao)包(bao)含“為(wei)他人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)謀(mou)取利益(yi)”和(he)“收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)財(cai)物”兩(liang)個(ge)方面，且通常以是(shi)(shi)否收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)了財(cai)物作為(wei)判(pan)(pan)斷(duan)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)成立(li)的(de)(de)標準(zhun)，因(yin)此(ci)，對受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)著手的(de)(de)認定(ding)(ding)就(jiu)要(yao)依(yi)據國家(jia)工(gong)作人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)員是(shi)(shi)否具(ju)有(you)(you)收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)財(cai)物的(de)(de)現(xian)實危(wei)(wei)險來判(pan)(pan)斷(duan)。國家(jia)工(gong)作人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)員與行賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)單純地達(da)成籠統(tong)的(de)(de)行受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)合(he)意(yi)(yi)的(de)(de)行為(wei)，本質上是(shi)(shi)一種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)犯(fan)罪(zui)約定(ding)(ding)，這種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)約定(ding)(ding)應屬(shu)于犯(fan)罪(zui)的(de)(de)預備或者是(shi)(shi)一種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)犯(fan)意(yi)(yi)流露，不(bu)會使國家(jia)工(gong)作人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)員產生收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)財(cai)物的(de)(de)現(xian)實危(wei)(wei)險，因(yin)此(ci)，也就(jiu)不(bu)屬(shu)于受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)的(de)(de)著手，不(bu)需要(yao)對約定(ding)(ding)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)進行刑事處(chu)罰(fa)。

　　收受借條或書面協議的行為是否成立受賄罪未遂，需要具體分析

　　實踐(jian)中，行(xing)(xing)(xing)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)雙方在達成行(xing)(xing)(xing)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)合(he)意后，有(you)(you)(you)時會(hui)以“打(da)借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)”或“簽(qian)書(shu)面協議”的(de)(de)(de)(de)方式來保證約(yue)定(ding)有(you)(you)(you)效或規避(bi)組織(zhi)調查(cha)。此(ci)(ci)(ci)時，約(yue)定(ding)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)或簽(qian)書(shu)面協議的(de)(de)(de)(de)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)是(shi)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)未(wei)遂還是(shi)不構(gou)成犯罪(zui)，理(li)論(lun)界和實務部門(men)有(you)(you)(you)較大爭議。實踐(jian)中，對(dui)于(yu)(yu)此(ci)(ci)(ci)種(zhong)情形，有(you)(you)(you)法(fa)院(yuan)認(ren)定(ding)為(wei)(wei)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)未(wei)遂，如云南銅業（集(ji)團）有(you)(you)(you)限(xian)公司原(yuan)董事長鄒(zou)(zou)韶(shao)祿(lu)(lu)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)案(an)(an)中，鄒(zou)(zou)韶(shao)祿(lu)(lu)利用(yong)職務便利為(wei)(wei)昆明(ming)某(mou)(mou)集(ji)團有(you)(you)(you)限(xian)公司謀取利益后，收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)該集(ji)團董事長鄭某(mou)(mou)出具(ju)(ju)的(de)(de)(de)(de)一(yi)張載明(ming)“鄭某(mou)(mou)借(jie)(jie)到(dao)鄒(zou)(zou)某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)（鄒(zou)(zou)韶(shao)祿(lu)(lu)之弟）人(ren)民幣800萬(wan)(wan)元整”的(de)(de)(de)(de)借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)，至(zhi)案(an)(an)發未(wei)“兌(dui)現(xian)”。昆明(ming)市(shi)中級(ji)人(ren)民法(fa)院(yuan)最終(zhong)認(ren)定(ding)該筆事實成立(li)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)未(wei)遂。依據該判決(jue)，能(neng)否(fou)認(ren)為(wei)(wei)約(yue)定(ding)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)行(xing)(xing)(xing)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)的(de)(de)(de)(de)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)均成立(li)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)未(wei)遂？筆者認(ren)為(wei)(wei)仍(reng)需(xu)結(jie)合(he)具(ju)(ju)體案(an)(an)情進(jin)行(xing)(xing)(xing)分析。在鄒(zou)(zou)韶(shao)祿(lu)(lu)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)案(an)(an)中，行(xing)(xing)(xing)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)鄭某(mou)(mou)本欲直(zhi)接送予(yu)鄒(zou)(zou)韶(shao)祿(lu)(lu)800萬(wan)(wan)元現(xian)金(jin)，鄒(zou)(zou)韶(shao)祿(lu)(lu)看到(dao)幾大袋現(xian)金(jin)后，因(yin)擔心暴露而不敢(gan)直(zhi)接收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)，之后，鄭某(mou)(mou)便向其出具(ju)(ju)了(le)一(yi)張借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)，并(bing)(bing)保證可以隨時兌(dui)現(xian)，鄒(zou)(zou)韶(shao)祿(lu)(lu)收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)該借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)后一(yi)直(zhi)存放于(yu)(yu)自己(ji)的(de)(de)(de)(de)保險柜(ju)內，直(zhi)到(dao)相關人(ren)員被查(cha)處(chu)后才(cai)將借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)銷(xiao)毀(hui)。結(jie)合(he)案(an)(an)情可知，鄒(zou)(zou)韶(shao)祿(lu)(lu)不是(shi)不想收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)這800萬(wan)(wan)元，而是(shi)想通過一(yi)種(zhong)較為(wei)(wei)隱(yin)蔽(bi)的(de)(de)(de)(de)方式收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)，收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)以及將借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)存于(yu)(yu)保險柜(ju)的(de)(de)(de)(de)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)表明(ming)其并(bing)(bing)未(wei)放棄該筆賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)款。鄒(zou)(zou)韶(shao)祿(lu)(lu)雖(sui)然沒有(you)(you)(you)直(zhi)接收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)800萬(wan)(wan)元現(xian)金(jin)，但其收(shou)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)借(jie)(jie)條(tiao)的(de)(de)(de)(de)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)表明(ming)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)保護的(de)(de)(de)(de)法(fa)益已經處(chu)于(yu)(yu)被侵(qin)害的(de)(de)(de)(de)現(xian)實危險之中，屬于(yu)(yu)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)的(de)(de)(de)(de)著手(shou)，因(yin)此(ci)(ci)(ci)，法(fa)院(yuan)判決(jue)成立(li)受(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)(hui)罪(zui)未(wei)遂是(shi)正(zheng)確的(de)(de)(de)(de)。

　　但實(shi)(shi)踐中，也存在這樣的情況(kuang)，即約定受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)雖然(ran)收(shou)受(shou)(shou)了(le)行(xing)(xing)(xing)(xing)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)出具的“借(jie)條”或“書(shu)面(mian)(mian)協議”，但相(xiang)關手續僅是(shi)一種(zhong)形式，行(xing)(xing)(xing)(xing)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)雙方(fang)并未(wei)(wei)視其為(wei)(wei)有效(xiao)法律依據，事后亦未(wei)(wei)真正打算按(an)照借(jie)條或書(shu)面(mian)(mian)協議中所(suo)約定的內(nei)容兌現。此時(shi)，約定受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)雖然(ran)收(shou)受(shou)(shou)了(le)行(xing)(xing)(xing)(xing)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)出具的借(jie)條，但收(shou)受(shou)(shou)借(jie)條的行(xing)(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)對其獲得賄(hui)(hui)(hui)賂物(wu)并無實(shi)(shi)質性的保障(zhang)作用，也不會對受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)罪保護的法益造成(cheng)現實(shi)(shi)性的危險(xian)。對這種(zhong)情形，筆者(zhe)認為(wei)(wei)不宜按(an)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)罪未(wei)(wei)遂進行(xing)(xing)(xing)(xing)處理。

　　約定受賄人對行賄人保管的財物具有足夠控制力的，成立受賄罪既遂

　　我國刑(xing)法理論(lun)上和實(shi)務部(bu)門(men)通常將行為人是否實(shi)際收受(shou)(shou)了財(cai)(cai)(cai)物作為區分受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)既遂和未遂的標準，而在對“實(shi)際收受(shou)(shou)財(cai)(cai)(cai)物”的理解上，則(ze)(ze)以行為人是否實(shi)際控制了財(cai)(cai)(cai)物為標準，實(shi)際控制財(cai)(cai)(cai)物的視為實(shi)際收受(shou)(shou)了財(cai)(cai)(cai)物，成立受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)既遂，反(fan)之(zhi)則(ze)(ze)成立受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)未遂。

　　在(zai)(zai)約(yue)定(ding)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)中(zhong)，由(you)于(yu)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)人并未實(shi)際(ji)占有(you)約(yue)定(ding)的(de)財(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)，對財(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)缺(que)乏實(shi)際(ji)控制力(li)，故實(shi)踐中(zhong)約(yue)定(ding)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)行(xing)為(wei)(wei)多被認定(ding)為(wei)(wei)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)罪(zui)(zui)未遂或不構(gou)成犯罪(zui)(zui)。但在(zai)(zai)有(you)些情況下，受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)人為(wei)(wei)規避法律制裁(cai)，會與行(xing)賄(hui)人商定(ding)不直接交付財(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)，而是由(you)行(xing)賄(hui)人進(jin)行(xing)保管，待受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)人需要(yao)時再獲取財(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)。此時，如何認定(ding)約(yue)定(ding)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)人的(de)刑事責任(ren)？筆者認為(wei)(wei)，關(guan)鍵在(zai)(zai)于(yu)考察受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)人對行(xing)賄(hui)人所保管財(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)的(de)控制力(li)，有(you)足(zu)夠控制力(li)的(de)，成立受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)罪(zui)(zui)既遂，反之，成立受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)罪(zui)(zui)未遂或者不構(gou)成犯罪(zui)(zui)。在(zai)(zai)對控制力(li)的(de)認定(ding)上，可(ke)從行(xing)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)雙方的(de)關(guan)系和財(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)所處(chu)的(de)狀態兩方面進(jin)行(xing)綜合把握。

　　一、行(xing)受(shou)賄(hui)雙(shuang)(shuang)方的(de)(de)(de)關(guan)系(xi)。一般來講，只有行(xing)受(shou)賄(hui)雙(shuang)(shuang)方關(guan)系(xi)密(mi)切，互(hu)相信(xin)任，且受(shou)賄(hui)人對(dui)行(xing)賄(hui)人的(de)(de)(de)行(xing)為(wei)具有一定的(de)(de)(de)把控(kong)力時，受(shou)賄(hui)人才能保證(zheng)行(xing)賄(hui)人所保管財物的(de)(de)(de)安全性，才能達到對(dui)財物隨用隨取的(de)(de)(de)支(zhi)配狀態。反(fan)之，則難以認(ren)定受(shou)賄(hui)人對(dui)行(xing)賄(hui)人保管的(de)(de)(de)財物具有實際(ji)控(kong)制力。

　　二(er)(er)、財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)所處的狀(zhuang)態(tai)。具體可(ke)區分以下(xia)幾(ji)種(zhong)情(qing)況，一(yi)是對(dui)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)進行(xing)(xing)(xing)了單(dan)獨保管(guan)。這(zhe)種(zhong)情(qing)況下(xia)，如(ru)果受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)獲(huo)得(de)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)沒有(you)其他(ta)客觀(guan)障(zhang)礙，可(ke)以隨用隨取(qu)，則一(yi)般應認定受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)對(dui)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)具有(you)控制(zhi)(zhi)力。二(er)(er)是對(dui)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)單(dan)獨保管(guan)，但(dan)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)取(qu)得(de)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)需要借助行(xing)(xing)(xing)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)的幫助。例如(ru)，行(xing)(xing)(xing)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)雖(sui)然(ran)將(jiang)其保管(guan)的財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)單(dan)獨存入(ru)了某銀行(xing)(xing)(xing)賬(zhang)(zhang)戶，但(dan)賬(zhang)(zhang)戶卻是以自己名字開(kai)的，這(zhe)種(zhong)情(qing)況就要考(kao)察受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)取(qu)得(de)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)的難易程度、行(xing)(xing)(xing)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)的心態(tai)及財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)產狀(zhuang)況等多種(zhong)因(yin)素，并(bing)依此(ci)(ci)判(pan)(pan)斷(duan)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)對(dui)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)的控制(zhi)(zhi)情(qing)況。三是財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)沒有(you)單(dan)獨保管(guan)。這(zhe)種(zhong)情(qing)況下(xia)，說明受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)取(qu)得(de)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)的保障(zhang)性不強(qiang)，對(dui)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)的控制(zhi)(zhi)力存在一(yi)定障(zhang)礙，但(dan)不能據(ju)此(ci)(ci)認為此(ci)(ci)種(zhong)情(qing)形下(xia)均不成立(li)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)罪既遂，仍需要結合具體案情(qing)來判(pan)(pan)斷(duan)受(shou)(shou)賄(hui)(hui)(hui)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)對(dui)財(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)(cai)物(wu)(wu)(wu)的實際(ji)控制(zhi)(zhi)力。

　　（李丁濤  作者單位：重慶市紀(ji)委監委）