內容提要：

　　刑(xing)法第三百九十(shi)七條(tiao)規定(ding)(ding)了(le)(le)濫用職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)，刑(xing)法第一百六十(shi)八條(tiao)規定(ding)(ding)了(le)(le)國(guo)有(you)公司(si)、企業(ye)人員(yuan)(yuan)濫用職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)，兩(liang)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)的(de)(de)主(zhu)要區別在(zai)于(yu)犯(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)主(zhu)體(ti)(ti)(ti)和(he)侵(qin)犯(fan)(fan)的(de)(de)客(ke)(ke)體(ti)(ti)(ti)不同。前者(zhe)的(de)(de)犯(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)主(zhu)體(ti)(ti)(ti)是國(guo)家機關工作(zuo)人員(yuan)(yuan)，侵(qin)犯(fan)(fan)的(de)(de)客(ke)(ke)體(ti)(ti)(ti)是國(guo)家機關的(de)(de)正常管(guan)理活動；后者(zhe)的(de)(de)犯(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)主(zhu)體(ti)(ti)(ti)是國(guo)有(you)公司(si)、企業(ye)的(de)(de)工作(zuo)人員(yuan)(yuan)，侵(qin)犯(fan)(fan)的(de)(de)客(ke)(ke)體(ti)(ti)(ti)是國(guo)有(you)公司(si)、企業(ye)的(de)(de)財產(chan)權(quan)益和(he)社會主(zhu)義(yi)市場經濟(ji)秩序。實踐中(zhong)，對于(yu)受委托管(guan)理國(guo)有(you)資產(chan)的(de)(de)國(guo)有(you)公司(si)管(guan)理人員(yuan)(yuan)在(zai)從(cong)(cong)事公務過程中(zhong)的(de)(de)濫用職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)行為，應(ying)從(cong)(cong)行為人的(de)(de)主(zhu)體(ti)(ti)(ti)身份、主(zhu)觀故意、客(ke)(ke)觀行為以及(ji)造成的(de)(de)危害后果等方面綜合(he)分析，準確認定(ding)(ding)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)名。

　　基本案情

　　劉某，2015年至2020年任甲市(shi)乙(yi)(yi)房(fang)產經營管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)有限(xian)責任公(gong)(gong)司(si)（市(shi)屬(shu)國(guo)企，以下簡稱乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)司(si)）總經理(li)(li)。2004年，甲市(shi)國(guo)有資產監(jian)督管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)委員會委托乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)司(si)管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)市(shi)直管(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)房(fang)5800棟（直管(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)房(fang)一般是指產權歸屬(shu)當地人民政府所有，由直管(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)房(fang)管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)單位代表人民政府直接支配、管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)的(de)公(gong)(gong)有房(fang)屋，包括住宅公(gong)(gong)房(fang)和非住宅公(gong)(gong)房(fang)），乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)司(si)負責管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)、維(wei)護(hu)公(gong)(gong)房(fang)及(ji)收取房(fang)租(zu)等(deng)，承擔保障國(guo)有資產安全等(deng)責任。

　　甲(jia)市(shi)(shi)政府根據(ju)《中(zhong)華(hua)人(ren)民(min)共和國城(cheng)(cheng)市(shi)(shi)房(fang)(fang)(fang)地(di)產(chan)管(guan)理法(fa)》以(yi)及本省城(cheng)(cheng)鎮公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)有(you)(you)房(fang)(fang)(fang)產(chan)管(guan)理條例(li)等地(di)方(fang)性法(fa)規(gui)，制(zhi)定(ding)(ding)了《公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)有(you)(you)房(fang)(fang)(fang)產(chan)使(shi)用(yong)權(quan)(quan)有(you)(you)償(chang)(chang)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)管(guan)理辦法(fa)》、《關于公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)有(you)(you)房(fang)(fang)(fang)產(chan)使(shi)用(yong)權(quan)(quan)有(you)(you)償(chang)(chang)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)收費標準(zhun)的(de)(de)(de)通知》等。根據(ju)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)，住(zhu)(zhu)宅(zhai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)房(fang)(fang)(fang)的(de)(de)(de)承(cheng)租人(ren)經(jing)產(chan)權(quan)(quan)單(dan)(dan)位同(tong)意，可(ke)以(yi)將(jiang)自(zi)己承(cheng)租的(de)(de)(de)住(zhu)(zhu)宅(zhai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)房(fang)(fang)(fang)使(shi)用(yong)權(quan)(quan)按(an)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)有(you)(you)償(chang)(chang)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)給他人(ren)，甲(jia)市(shi)(shi)居民(min)經(jing)審批可(ke)以(yi)有(you)(you)償(chang)(chang)受讓(rang)(rang)住(zhu)(zhu)宅(zhai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)房(fang)(fang)(fang)使(shi)用(yong)權(quan)(quan)。轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)住(zhu)(zhu)宅(zhai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)房(fang)(fang)(fang)使(shi)用(yong)權(quan)(quan)的(de)(de)(de)價格(ge)應當在住(zhu)(zhu)宅(zhai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)房(fang)(fang)(fang)管(guan)理單(dan)(dan)位評(ping)估意見基(ji)礎上由轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)雙方(fang)協商確(que)定(ding)(ding)，同(tong)時必須按(an)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)價10%的(de)(de)(de)比(bi)例(li)向房(fang)(fang)(fang)屋產(chan)權(quan)(quan)單(dan)(dan)位繳納費用(yong)，該費用(yong)應全額上繳并(bing)納入市(shi)(shi)財政統一管(guan)理。乙公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司亦(yi)專門制(zhi)定(ding)(ding)文件明確(que)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)，公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司管(guan)理的(de)(de)(de)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)有(you)(you)房(fang)(fang)(fang)產(chan)使(shi)用(yong)權(quan)(quan)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)必須經(jing)過評(ping)估并(bing)繳納轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)費用(yong)，確(que)有(you)(you)特(te)殊情況(kuang)，需(xu)報請市(shi)(shi)國資委審核(he)批準(zhun)。

　　劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)任(ren)乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)司(si)總(zong)(zong)(zong)經(jing)(jing)(jing)(jing)理(li)期間，負責公(gong)(gong)司(si)管理(li)公(gong)(gong)房(fang)使用(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)有償轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)(rang)業務的(de)(de)審批(pi)(pi)工作(zuo)(zuo)(zuo)。2016年(nian)至2020年(nian)，王某(mou)(mou)(mou)等(deng)多(duo)(duo)名住宅(zhai)公(gong)(gong)房(fang)使用(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)(rang)方或(huo)受讓(rang)(rang)(rang)方找到劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)并(bing)送(song)予其好處共計50余(yu)萬元(yuan)，請求(qiu)少(shao)交(jiao)或(huo)免(mian)交(jiao)住宅(zhai)公(gong)(gong)房(fang)使用(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)(rang)費(fei)(fei)(fei)。劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)明知甲市和乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)司(si)有明確規定，公(gong)(gong)房(fang)使用(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)(rang)必須經(jing)(jing)(jing)(jing)過(guo)評估并(bing)繳納轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)(rang)費(fei)(fei)(fei)用(yong)(yong)(yong)，但仍(reng)徇私(si)情謀(mou)私(si)利，安排具體(ti)經(jing)(jing)(jing)(jing)辦(ban)(ban)住宅(zhai)公(gong)(gong)房(fang)使用(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)(rang)業務的(de)(de)乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)司(si)工作(zuo)(zuo)(zuo)人(ren)員(yuan)(yuan)(yuan)，幫助王某(mou)(mou)(mou)等(deng)相(xiang)關人(ren)員(yuan)(yuan)(yuan)順利填報材(cai)料(liao)、辦(ban)(ban)理(li)手續，當工作(zuo)(zuo)(zuo)人(ren)員(yuan)(yuan)(yuan)找到劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)請其審批(pi)(pi)確定轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)(rang)費(fei)(fei)(fei)收(shou)(shou)(shou)費(fei)(fei)(fei)標準(zhun)時，劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)表示(shi)要少(shao)收(shou)(shou)(shou)或(huo)免(mian)收(shou)(shou)(shou)。工作(zuo)(zuo)(zuo)人(ren)員(yuan)(yuan)(yuan)表示(shi)，按照甲市規定，應當按照轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)(rang)價10%的(de)(de)比例收(shou)(shou)(shou)費(fei)(fei)(fei)。劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)以相(xiang)關人(ren)員(yuan)(yuan)(yuan)家庭困難等(deng)為(wei)理(li)由，讓(rang)(rang)(rang)工作(zuo)(zuo)(zuo)人(ren)員(yuan)(yuan)(yuan)按其說的(de)(de)辦(ban)(ban)。乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)司(si)相(xiang)關工作(zuo)(zuo)(zuo)人(ren)員(yuan)(yuan)(yuan)和會(hui)計表示(shi)，“轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)(rang)費(fei)(fei)(fei)收(shou)(shou)(shou)取(qu)的(de)(de)具體(ti)數額是由總(zong)(zong)(zong)經(jing)(jing)(jing)(jing)理(li)決定，總(zong)(zong)(zong)經(jing)(jing)(jing)(jing)理(li)定多(duo)(duo)少(shao)就是多(duo)(duo)少(shao)，沒有進行評估”，“總(zong)(zong)(zong)經(jing)(jing)(jing)(jing)理(li)會(hui)在(zai)審批(pi)(pi)意見欄寫(xie)上收(shou)(shou)(shou)費(fei)(fei)(fei)數額，沒寫(xie)數額時就打(da)電(dian)話(hua)問總(zong)(zong)(zong)經(jing)(jing)(jing)(jing)理(li)，總(zong)(zong)(zong)經(jing)(jing)(jing)(jing)理(li)說收(shou)(shou)(shou)多(duo)(duo)少(shao)就收(shou)(shou)(shou)多(duo)(duo)少(shao)”。

　　2022年，劉某(mou)案(an)發。經鑒定(ding)，劉某(mou)違規對(dui)乙公(gong)司管理(li)的部分公(gong)房(fang)使用權轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)費進行免(mian)收(shou)(shou)、少收(shou)(shou)，其(qi)中免(mian)收(shou)(shou)50套住宅公(gong)房(fang)使用權轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)費合計(ji)110余萬元；少收(shou)(shou)80套住宅公(gong)房(fang)使用權轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)費合計(ji)70萬元。劉某(mou)被立案(an)調查后(hou)，其(qi)親屬及相關住宅公(gong)房(fang)使用權轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)方(fang)和(he)受讓(rang)(rang)方(fang)將劉某(mou)免(mian)收(shou)(shou)或少收(shou)(shou)的轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)費180余萬元補齊(qi)。

　　分歧意見

　　本案中，對于(yu)劉某利用職務便利收取他人50余萬元構成受賄犯罪并(bing)無爭議(yi)，但(dan)對劉某為他人減(jian)免(mian)住宅(zhai)公(gong)房使用權轉讓費的(de)行為如何(he)定性，存在(zai)兩種意見：

　　第(di)一種意見認為(wei)：劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)構成(cheng)國(guo)有公(gong)(gong)司(si)、企業(ye)(ye)人(ren)員(yuan)濫用(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)。劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)作為(wei)國(guo)有公(gong)(gong)司(si)總經(jing)(jing)理，明知按照甲市政(zheng)府(fu)和(he)乙公(gong)(gong)司(si)的(de)規定，公(gong)(gong)司(si)管理的(de)公(gong)(gong)有房(fang)產使用(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉讓必須(xu)經(jing)(jing)過評估并繳納轉讓費(fei)(fei)用(yong)(yong)，仍違(wei)規決定不進行評估、擅(shan)自為(wei)他人(ren)減免費(fei)(fei)用(yong)(yong)，且在下屬(shu)(shu)提醒應當(dang)按轉讓價10%的(de)比例收(shou)取費(fei)(fei)用(yong)(yong)時，劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)以相關人(ren)員(yuan)家庭困(kun)難(nan)等為(wei)借口，掩飾其(qi)收(shou)受他人(ren)好(hao)處后違(wei)規減免費(fei)(fei)用(yong)(yong)的(de)行為(wei)，因其(qi)濫用(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)行為(wei)，導致免收(shou)、少(shao)收(shou)住宅(zhai)公(gong)(gong)房(fang)使用(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉讓費(fei)(fei)共計180余萬元(yuan)。根據刑法第(di)一百六十八條規定，劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)的(de)行為(wei)屬(shu)(shu)于(yu)國(guo)有公(gong)(gong)司(si)、企業(ye)(ye)的(de)工作人(ren)員(yuan)濫用(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)造成(cheng)國(guo)有公(gong)(gong)司(si)、企業(ye)(ye)嚴(yan)重損(sun)失，致使國(guo)家利益遭受重大損(sun)失的(de)情形(xing)，應當(dang)認定劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)構成(cheng)國(guo)有公(gong)(gong)司(si)、企業(ye)(ye)人(ren)員(yuan)濫用(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)，與受賄罪(zui)并罰。

　　第二(er)種意見認(ren)為(wei)：劉某(mou)構成(cheng)濫用(yong)(yong)(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)罪(zui)(zui)。對于(yu)劉某(mou)濫用(yong)(yong)(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)行為(wei)的(de)認(ren)定與(yu)第一種意見一致(zhi)，但劉某(mou)在本(ben)起事實中(zhong)的(de)身份應認(ren)定為(wei)國(guo)家(jia)機關工作人員，符合刑法(fa)第三百九十七(qi)條規定的(de)濫用(yong)(yong)(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)罪(zui)(zui)的(de)主(zhu)體要件。乙公(gong)司受甲市(shi)國(guo)有資產監督管理(li)委(wei)(wei)員會委(wei)(wei)托管理(li)市(shi)直管公(gong)房，負責(ze)辦(ban)理(li)公(gong)房使(shi)用(yong)(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)(quan)(quan)轉讓手續(xu)及收取轉讓費，劉某(mou)作為(wei)乙公(gong)司總(zong)經理(li)，在監督管理(li)市(shi)直管公(gong)房等國(guo)有資產時，履行的(de)是行政管理(li)職(zhi)(zhi)能，屬于(yu)“在受國(guo)家(jia)機關委(wei)(wei)托代表(biao)(biao)國(guo)家(jia)機關行使(shi)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)的(de)組(zu)織中(zhong)從事公(gong)務(wu)的(de)人員”，根據《全國(guo)人民(min)(min)代表(biao)(biao)大(da)會常務(wu)委(wei)(wei)員會關于(yu)〈中(zhong)華人民(min)(min)共和國(guo)刑法(fa)〉第九章瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)罪(zui)(zui)主(zhu)體適用(yong)(yong)(yong)(yong)問題的(de)解釋》，對于(yu)劉某(mou)應當按(an)照濫用(yong)(yong)(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)(quan)(quan)罪(zui)(zui)定罪(zui)(zui)，與(yu)受賄罪(zui)(zui)并(bing)罰(fa)。

　　筆者(zhe)同意第(di)二種意見(jian)，具體分析如(ru)下。

　　意見分析

　　劉某符合濫(lan)用(yong)職權(quan)罪的主體要件

　　刑(xing)法(fa)第三百(bai)九十七條(tiao)規定(ding)的(de)(de)濫(lan)(lan)用職(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)與刑(xing)法(fa)第一百(bai)六十八(ba)條(tiao)規定(ding)的(de)(de)國有(you)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)、企業(ye)人員濫(lan)(lan)用職(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)，雖然客(ke)觀(guan)上(shang)都(dou)屬于濫(lan)(lan)用職(zhi)權(quan)行為，但(dan)是(shi)(shi)(shi)二者有(you)著顯著區別。從侵犯(fan)(fan)(fan)的(de)(de)客(ke)體(ti)和(he)客(ke)觀(guan)行為看，濫(lan)(lan)用職(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)規定(ding)在(zai)刑(xing)法(fa)分(fen)則第九章(zhang)瀆職(zhi)罪(zui)(zui)中，侵犯(fan)(fan)(fan)的(de)(de)客(ke)體(ti)是(shi)(shi)(shi)國家(jia)機(ji)關的(de)(de)正常(chang)(chang)管理(li)(li)活動，客(ke)觀(guan)表現(xian)通常(chang)(chang)是(shi)(shi)(shi)國家(jia)機(ji)關工作人員超越職(zhi)權(quan)范圍或違反規定(ding)處(chu)理(li)(li)公(gong)(gong)(gong)務。國有(you)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)、企業(ye)人員濫(lan)(lan)用職(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)規定(ding)在(zai)刑(xing)法(fa)分(fen)則第三章(zhang)破壞社會(hui)主(zhu)(zhu)義市場經濟秩序(xu)罪(zui)(zui)中，侵犯(fan)(fan)(fan)的(de)(de)客(ke)體(ti)是(shi)(shi)(shi)國有(you)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)、企業(ye)的(de)(de)財產權(quan)益(yi)和(he)社會(hui)主(zhu)(zhu)義市場經濟秩序(xu)，客(ke)觀(guan)表現(xian)通常(chang)(chang)是(shi)(shi)(shi)管理(li)(li)混亂、違規決(jue)定(ding)投資(zi)等導(dao)致企業(ye)破產或嚴(yan)重虧損的(de)(de)行為。從犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)主(zhu)(zhu)體(ti)上(shang)看，國有(you)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)、企業(ye)人員濫(lan)(lan)用職(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)的(de)(de)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)主(zhu)(zhu)體(ti)要(yao)(yao)求(qiu)是(shi)(shi)(shi)國有(you)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)、企業(ye)的(de)(de)工作人員；濫(lan)(lan)用職(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)的(de)(de)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)主(zhu)(zhu)體(ti)要(yao)(yao)求(qiu)是(shi)(shi)(shi)國家(jia)機(ji)關工作人員。

　　濫用職(zhi)(zhi)權罪屬于瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)罪的一(yi)種表現(xian)形式。根據《全國(guo)(guo)人(ren)民(min)代表大會常(chang)務(wu)委員(yuan)會關(guan)于〈中華(hua)人(ren)民(min)共(gong)和國(guo)(guo)刑法〉第(di)九章(zhang)瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)罪主體適用問(wen)題的解釋》，“在(zai)依(yi)照法律(lv)、法規(gui)(gui)規(gui)(gui)定(ding)(ding)行使(shi)(shi)國(guo)(guo)家(jia)行政管理職(zhi)(zhi)權的組(zu)織中從(cong)事公務(wu)的人(ren)員(yuan)，或者(zhe)在(zai)受國(guo)(guo)家(jia)機關(guan)委托代表國(guo)(guo)家(jia)機關(guan)行使(shi)(shi)職(zhi)(zhi)權的組(zu)織中從(cong)事公務(wu)的人(ren)員(yuan)，或者(zhe)雖未列入國(guo)(guo)家(jia)機關(guan)人(ren)員(yuan)編制但在(zai)國(guo)(guo)家(jia)機關(guan)中從(cong)事公務(wu)的人(ren)員(yuan)，在(zai)代表國(guo)(guo)家(jia)機關(guan)行使(shi)(shi)職(zhi)(zhi)權時，有瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)行為，構成犯罪的，依(yi)照刑法關(guan)于瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)罪的規(gui)(gui)定(ding)(ding)追究刑事責任。”

　　本(ben)案中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)系國(guo)(guo)(guo)有(you)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)，受(shou)甲(jia)市(shi)國(guo)(guo)(guo)資(zi)委(wei)(wei)委(wei)(wei)托(tuo)(tuo)管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)市(shi)直管(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)房，負(fu)責(ze)管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)、維護公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)房及(ji)收取房租(zu)等，并承擔保(bao)障國(guo)(guo)(guo)有(you)資(zi)產安全等責(ze)任，履行(xing)(xing)的(de)(de)(de)(de)是行(xing)(xing)政(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)職(zhi)能。劉(liu)(liu)(liu)某(mou)(mou)屬(shu)(shu)于(yu)刑法第(di)九(jiu)十三條規定的(de)(de)(de)(de)“國(guo)(guo)(guo)有(you)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)、企業、事業單位(wei)、人(ren)民(min)團體(ti)中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)從事公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)務的(de)(de)(de)(de)人(ren)員”，應當以國(guo)(guo)(guo)家(jia)(jia)工(gong)作人(ren)員論(lun)。在刑法上，國(guo)(guo)(guo)家(jia)(jia)機關(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)工(gong)作人(ren)員的(de)(de)(de)(de)范(fan)圍(wei)比國(guo)(guo)(guo)家(jia)(jia)工(gong)作人(ren)員的(de)(de)(de)(de)范(fan)圍(wei)要(yao)(yao)小，并非所有(you)國(guo)(guo)(guo)家(jia)(jia)工(gong)作人(ren)員均系國(guo)(guo)(guo)家(jia)(jia)機關(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)工(gong)作人(ren)員。因(yin)此(ci)，認(ren)定劉(liu)(liu)(liu)某(mou)(mou)是否構成(cheng)濫用職(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)，還需要(yao)(yao)看其身份是否屬(shu)(shu)于(yu)國(guo)(guo)(guo)家(jia)(jia)機關(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)工(gong)作人(ren)員。本(ben)案中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，甲(jia)市(shi)國(guo)(guo)(guo)資(zi)委(wei)(wei)委(wei)(wei)托(tuo)(tuo)乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)代為(wei)管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)轄區(qu)內直管(guan)(guan)(guan)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)房，乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)屬(shu)(shu)于(yu)協助政(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)府(fu)從事公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)務。劉(liu)(liu)(liu)某(mou)(mou)作為(wei)乙(yi)(yi)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)總(zong)經(jing)理(li)(li)，負(fu)責(ze)該公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)的(de)(de)(de)(de)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)房使(shi)用權(quan)有(you)償轉(zhuan)讓(rang)業務的(de)(de)(de)(de)審批工(gong)作，從事的(de)(de)(de)(de)是管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)國(guo)(guo)(guo)有(you)資(zi)產的(de)(de)(de)(de)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)務，屬(shu)(shu)于(yu)“在受(shou)國(guo)(guo)(guo)家(jia)(jia)機關(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)委(wei)(wei)托(tuo)(tuo)代表(biao)國(guo)(guo)(guo)家(jia)(jia)機關(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)行(xing)(xing)使(shi)職(zhi)權(quan)的(de)(de)(de)(de)組(zu)織中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)從事公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)務的(de)(de)(de)(de)人(ren)員”，所實(shi)施的(de)(de)(de)(de)行(xing)(xing)為(wei)系受(shou)政(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)府(fu)委(wei)(wei)托(tuo)(tuo)進(jin)行(xing)(xing)的(de)(de)(de)(de)行(xing)(xing)政(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)管(guan)(guan)(guan)理(li)(li)行(xing)(xing)為(wei)，因(yin)此(ci)，根據《全國(guo)(guo)(guo)人(ren)民(min)代表(biao)大會常務委(wei)(wei)員會關(guan)(guan)(guan)(guan)于(yu)〈中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)華人(ren)民(min)共和國(guo)(guo)(guo)刑法〉第(di)九(jiu)章瀆職(zhi)罪(zui)(zui)主體(ti)適(shi)用問題的(de)(de)(de)(de)解釋》，本(ben)案中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，劉(liu)(liu)(liu)某(mou)(mou)符(fu)合刑法第(di)九(jiu)章規定的(de)(de)(de)(de)瀆職(zhi)罪(zui)(zui)的(de)(de)(de)(de)主體(ti)要(yao)(yao)件，這(zhe)也(ye)意味著(zhu)，劉(liu)(liu)(liu)某(mou)(mou)符(fu)合濫用職(zhi)權(quan)罪(zui)(zui)的(de)(de)(de)(de)主體(ti)要(yao)(yao)件。

　　主觀方面和客觀行為(wei)分析(xi)

　　根據最高人民(min)檢(jian)察院(yuan)《關于瀆職侵權(quan)犯罪(zui)案件立案標(biao)準的規(gui)定》，濫(lan)用職權(quan)罪(zui)是指國(guo)家(jia)機關工作人員超越職權(quan)，違法決(jue)定、處理其無權(quan)決(jue)定、處理的事項，或者(zhe)違反規(gui)定處理公(gong)務(wu)，致使公(gong)共財產、國(guo)家(jia)和人民(min)利益遭(zao)受重大損失的行為。認定濫(lan)用職權(quan)罪(zui)，應堅持主(zhu)客(ke)觀相(xiang)一致原則，結合行為人的主(zhu)觀方(fang)面(mian)和客(ke)觀行為綜合分(fen)析。

　　通常認為，濫用職權罪的(de)主觀方(fang)面(mian)由(you)故意(yi)構成，系(xi)國(guo)家(jia)機關(guan)(guan)工作人員(yuan)明(ming)知或(huo)應(ying)當(dang)明(ming)知自己的(de)行(xing)(xing)為會影響國(guo)家(jia)機關(guan)(guan)公(gong)務的(de)合法、公(gong)正、有效執(zhi)行(xing)(xing)，導致公(gong)共財(cai)產、國(guo)家(jia)和人民利益遭受(shou)重大損失(shi)的(de)危(wei)害(hai)后果(guo)，但對此持(chi)希望或(huo)放任態(tai)度。判(pan)斷(duan)主觀方(fang)面(mian)是否屬于(yu)故意(yi)，要把握兩個方(fang)面(mian)：一是行(xing)(xing)為人對自己的(de)危(wei)害(hai)行(xing)(xing)為造成的(de)危(wei)害(hai)結果(guo)有無認識以及認識程度；二是行(xing)(xing)為人對危(wei)害(hai)結果(guo)的(de)態(tai)度。具(ju)體案件中，要根據(ju)行(xing)(xing)為人的(de)動機，結合其(qi)客觀行(xing)(xing)為，判(pan)斷(duan)主觀目(mu)的(de)。

　　本案中，劉(liu)(liu)某(mou)在乙公司(si)長期(qi)擔任領導職務(wu)，明知甲市(shi)和乙公司(si)有明確規(gui)定，公房使用(yong)權轉(zhuan)(zhuan)讓必須經(jing)過評(ping)估(gu)并(bing)繳納轉(zhuan)(zhuan)讓費(fei)(fei)用(yong)，但仍徇私情謀私利，安排下屬幫(bang)助(zhu)王某(mou)等人(ren)(ren)順利填報(bao)材料、辦理手續，少(shao)收或免收費(fei)(fei)用(yong)。在工作人(ren)(ren)員(yuan)提(ti)示(shi)收費(fei)(fei)標準時，劉(liu)(liu)某(mou)不予(yu)理睬，要求工作人(ren)(ren)員(yuan)按其(qi)說(shuo)的(de)辦，不經(jing)評(ping)估(gu)擅(shan)自決定收費(fei)(fei)數額，造(zao)成國有資產損失(shi)。因此，劉(liu)(liu)某(mou)主觀上對行為造(zao)成的(de)危害后(hou)果(guo)是明知且放任的(de)，具有濫用(yong)職權的(de)故意。

　　在客(ke)觀(guan)方面，濫用(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權罪(zui)一(yi)般(ban)表現為(wei)(wei)故意(yi)不正當行使(shi)職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權，對有關(guan)(guan)事(shi)項(xiang)作出不符合(he)法律、行政法規、部門規章(zhang)、行業規定等的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)決定或(huo)(huo)處(chu)(chu)(chu)理(li)，或(huo)(huo)超(chao)越行為(wei)(wei)人(ren)(ren)職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)責(ze)權限處(chu)(chu)(chu)理(li)其無權處(chu)(chu)(chu)理(li)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)事(shi)項(xiang)，或(huo)(huo)背離職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)責(ze)要求亂作為(wei)(wei)以(yi)及故意(yi)棄權不履職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)。濫用(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權罪(zui)中的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)“職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權”一(yi)般(ban)是(shi)指行為(wei)(wei)人(ren)(ren)基于(yu)在國家機關(guan)(guan)等擔任一(yi)定職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)務，具有一(yi)定的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)責(ze)，以(yi)及由此產生的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)代表政府處(chu)(chu)(chu)理(li)公共事(shi)務的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)權力，濫用(yong)(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權罪(zui)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)本(ben)質特征就在于(yu)行為(wei)(wei)人(ren)(ren)對職(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)權的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)違規行使(shi)。

　　本案中，從客(ke)觀行為(wei)看，劉(liu)某的(de)違規(gui)(gui)行為(wei)體現(xian)在兩個方(fang)面(mian)。一是(shi)擅(shan)自(zi)決定(ding)不進行價(jia)(jia)格(ge)評(ping)估(gu)。劉(liu)某明知按(an)(an)照甲市(shi)(shi)和乙公(gong)司規(gui)(gui)定(ding)，住宅公(gong)房(fang)使(shi)用(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)必須經過評(ping)估(gu)確(que)(que)定(ding)評(ping)估(gu)意(yi)見價(jia)(jia)格(ge)，卻不按(an)(an)規(gui)(gui)定(ding)履職(zhi)，沒有(you)(you)按(an)(an)規(gui)(gui)定(ding)開展評(ping)估(gu)。二是(shi)擅(shan)自(zi)確(que)(que)定(ding)住宅公(gong)房(fang)使(shi)用(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)費數額。根據甲市(shi)(shi)和乙公(gong)司規(gui)(gui)定(ding)，住宅公(gong)房(fang)使(shi)用(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)必須按(an)(an)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)價(jia)(jia)10%的(de)比例(li)向(xiang)房(fang)屋(wu)產權(quan)單位(wei)繳納費用(yong)(yong)(yong)，并(bing)且(qie)該費用(yong)(yong)(yong)是(shi)需(xu)要全額上繳并(bing)納入市(shi)(shi)財政統一管理(li)的(de)，屬于國有(you)(you)資(zi)產。劉(liu)某收(shou)受他人好處后，在不進行價(jia)(jia)格(ge)評(ping)估(gu)的(de)基礎上，又隨意(yi)確(que)(que)定(ding)住宅公(gong)房(fang)使(shi)用(yong)(yong)(yong)權(quan)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)費數額，且(qie)在下(xia)(xia)屬進行提醒(xing)時(shi)，仍(reng)然擅(shan)自(zi)決定(ding)轉(zhuan)(zhuan)(zhuan)讓(rang)費數額。因此，劉(liu)某在負有(you)(you)管理(li)國有(you)(you)資(zi)產、保障國有(you)(you)資(zi)產安全職(zhi)責的(de)情況下(xia)(xia)，故(gu)意(yi)違反相(xiang)關規(gui)(gui)定(ding)，不正當(dang)行使(shi)職(zhi)權(quan)，符(fu)合濫用(yong)(yong)(yong)職(zhi)權(quan)罪的(de)客(ke)觀方(fang)面(mian)要件。

　　造(zao)成重大損(sun)失的認定

　　刑法(fa)(fa)第(di)三百(bai)九(jiu)十七條規定的(de)“重(zhong)(zhong)大(da)損(sun)(sun)(sun)失(shi)(shi)”，是(shi)指給國家和(he)人(ren)民造(zao)成的(de)重(zhong)(zhong)大(da)物(wu)質(zhi)(zhi)性(xing)損(sun)(sun)(sun)失(shi)(shi)和(he)非(fei)物(wu)質(zhi)(zhi)性(xing)損(sun)(sun)(sun)失(shi)(shi)，不(bu)僅包括(kuo)實際可以量化(hua)的(de)財(cai)產損(sun)(sun)(sun)失(shi)(shi)，還包括(kuo)公共(gong)財(cai)產、國家和(he)人(ren)民利(li)益其他方面的(de)損(sun)(sun)(sun)失(shi)(shi)。物(wu)質(zhi)(zhi)性(xing)損(sun)(sun)(sun)失(shi)(shi)一般包括(kuo)人(ren)員傷亡和(he)財(cai)物(wu)的(de)重(zhong)(zhong)大(da)損(sun)(sun)(sun)失(shi)(shi)，非(fei)物(wu)質(zhi)(zhi)性(xing)損(sun)(sun)(sun)失(shi)(shi)包括(kuo)嚴重(zhong)(zhong)損(sun)(sun)(sun)害國家機(ji)關的(de)正常活動和(he)聲(sheng)譽(yu)等。由于(yu)刑法(fa)(fa)對濫(lan)(lan)用職權罪的(de)規定屬于(yu)簡(jian)單罪狀(zhuang)，濫(lan)(lan)用職權罪造(zao)成的(de)重(zhong)(zhong)大(da)損(sun)(sun)(sun)失(shi)(shi)系由司法(fa)(fa)解釋規定。

　　“兩高”《關(guan)于(yu)辦理瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)刑事案件適用(yong)法律(lv)若干問題的(de)(de)(de)(de)解(jie)釋（一(yi)）》第一(yi)條(tiao)(tiao)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)，“國(guo)家機(ji)(ji)關(guan)工(gong)作人(ren)(ren)員(yuan)濫用(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權(quan)或(huo)者玩忽職(zhi)(zhi)守，具有下列情形之一(yi)的(de)(de)(de)(de)，應當(dang)認定(ding)(ding)為(wei)刑法第三百九十七條(tiao)(tiao)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)的(de)(de)(de)(de)‘致使(shi)(shi)公共財產(chan)(chan)、國(guo)家和人(ren)(ren)民利益遭受重(zhong)(zhong)大(da)損(sun)(sun)失’：……（二）造成(cheng)經(jing)(jing)(jing)濟(ji)(ji)損(sun)(sun)失30萬元以上(shang)的(de)(de)(de)(de)；（三）造成(cheng)惡(e)劣社會(hui)影響(xiang)的(de)(de)(de)(de)；（四(si)）其(qi)他致使(shi)(shi)公共財產(chan)(chan)、國(guo)家和人(ren)(ren)民利益遭受重(zhong)(zhong)大(da)損(sun)(sun)失的(de)(de)(de)(de)情形。”第八條(tiao)(tiao)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)，“本解(jie)釋規(gui)定(ding)(ding)的(de)(de)(de)(de)‘經(jing)(jing)(jing)濟(ji)(ji)損(sun)(sun)失’，是(shi)指瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)或(huo)者與瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)相關(guan)聯(lian)的(de)(de)(de)(de)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)立(li)案時(shi)已經(jing)(jing)(jing)實際(ji)造成(cheng)的(de)(de)(de)(de)財產(chan)(chan)損(sun)(sun)失，包括為(wei)挽回(hui)瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)所(suo)造成(cheng)損(sun)(sun)失而(er)支付(fu)的(de)(de)(de)(de)各種(zhong)開支、費用(yong)等。立(li)案后至(zhi)提起公訴前持續發生的(de)(de)(de)(de)經(jing)(jing)(jing)濟(ji)(ji)損(sun)(sun)失，應一(yi)并計入(ru)瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)造成(cheng)的(de)(de)(de)(de)經(jing)(jing)(jing)濟(ji)(ji)損(sun)(sun)失……瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)或(huo)者與瀆(du)職(zhi)(zhi)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)相關(guan)聯(lian)的(de)(de)(de)(de)犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)立(li)案后，犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)分(fen)子及(ji)其(qi)親友自行挽回(hui)的(de)(de)(de)(de)經(jing)(jing)(jing)濟(ji)(ji)損(sun)(sun)失，司法機(ji)(ji)關(guan)或(huo)者犯(fan)(fan)(fan)罪(zui)(zui)(zui)(zui)分(fen)子所(suo)在單位(wei)及(ji)其(qi)上(shang)級主管部門挽回(hui)的(de)(de)(de)(de)經(jing)(jing)(jing)濟(ji)(ji)損(sun)(sun)失，或(huo)者因客觀原因減少的(de)(de)(de)(de)經(jing)(jing)(jing)濟(ji)(ji)損(sun)(sun)失，不予扣減，但可以作為(wei)酌定(ding)(ding)從輕處罰(fa)的(de)(de)(de)(de)情節。”

　　本案中，根(gen)(gen)據甲市相(xiang)關規定(ding)，轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)住(zhu)宅公(gong)(gong)房使用(yong)(yong)權的(de)價格在住(zhu)宅公(gong)(gong)房管理(li)單位評(ping)估意見基礎(chu)上(shang)(shang)由(you)轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)雙方(fang)協商(shang)確定(ding)，同(tong)時必須(xu)按轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)價10%的(de)比例向房屋產權單位繳納費(fei)(fei)用(yong)(yong)，該(gai)費(fei)(fei)用(yong)(yong)應(ying)全(quan)額(e)上(shang)(shang)繳并納入(ru)市財(cai)政統一管理(li)。劉(liu)某違規行使職權，減(jian)免住(zhu)宅公(gong)(gong)房使用(yong)(yong)權轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)費(fei)(fei)共(gong)計180余(yu)萬(wan)(wan)元(yuan)(yuan)，這180余(yu)萬(wan)(wan)元(yuan)(yuan)系(xi)本應(ying)上(shang)(shang)繳財(cai)政成為(wei)國有(you)資產的(de)數(shu)額(e)，因劉(liu)某的(de)行為(wei)導致(zhi)“應(ying)收未收”，應(ying)當認(ren)定(ding)屬于致(zhi)使公(gong)(gong)共(gong)財(cai)產、國家(jia)和人民利益遭受重大損失(shi)。值(zhi)得注意的(de)是(shi)，雖(sui)然在劉(liu)某被立案調查后，其親屬及(ji)相(xiang)關住(zhu)宅公(gong)(gong)房使用(yong)(yong)權轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)方(fang)和受讓(rang)(rang)方(fang)將免收或少收的(de)轉(zhuan)讓(rang)(rang)費(fei)(fei)180余(yu)萬(wan)(wan)元(yuan)(yuan)補齊，但根(gen)(gen)據“兩高”《關于辦理(li)瀆(du)職刑事案件適用(yong)(yong)法律若(ruo)干問題的(de)解釋（一）》第八條規定(ding)，該(gai)數(shu)額(e)也不應(ying)從劉(liu)某濫(lan)用(yong)(yong)職權造成的(de)經濟損失(shi)中扣減(jian)，但可以作為(wei)對(dui)劉(liu)某從輕處罰(fa)的(de)量刑情節考慮。

　　綜上，劉某(mou)作為(wei)乙公司(si)總(zong)經(jing)理(li)，在(zai)從(cong)事(shi)的(de)(de)國有資產(chan)管理(li)工(gong)作中，屬于“在(zai)受(shou)國家(jia)機(ji)關委托代表國家(jia)機(ji)關行(xing)(xing)使(shi)職(zhi)(zhi)權的(de)(de)組織中從(cong)事(shi)公務的(de)(de)人員”，其濫(lan)用(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權行(xing)(xing)為(wei)致使(shi)公共財(cai)產(chan)、國家(jia)和人民(min)利益遭受(shou)重大損失(shi)，應(ying)當以濫(lan)用(yong)職(zhi)(zhi)權罪定性，與其構(gou)成的(de)(de)受(shou)賄罪并罰。（白潔）