受贿罪是一种具体的贿赂犯罪，侵犯了国家公职人员职务行为的廉洁性，社会危害性极大，因而我国一直予以重视并加强打击力度。但对收受款物后用于公务、公益支出的情形，我国刑法一直未就如何处罚作出明确规定。最高人民法院、最高人民检察院于2007年发布的司法解释曾对收受财物后退还上交型行为如何处理，作出了明确的规定；最高人民法院、最高人民检察院于2016年发布的司法解释进一步作出规定，即合法支出行为不影响受贿罪的成立，但可以作为酌定量刑情节考虑。这充分表明，合法支出对受贿犯罪的成立没有影响。尽管不能否认，这样的规定符合新时代的背景以及党和国家的政策要求，但其合理性也有研究的空间和必要。本文的研究主要有以下四个方面： 第一，通过对文建茂受贿案的介绍，引出本文将要讨论的受贿后“合法支出”性质进行认定这一论题。对案例的争议焦点及裁判结果进行简要概括和评价。对合法支出的内涵及分类进行介绍，并总结理论界对此问题存在的争议，即三种学说。 第二，指出合法支出影响受贿成立犯罪的问题实质，从合法支出和非法占有要素两个方面着手，从犯罪构成要件的角度，对影响犯罪构成的意义进行分析并就合法支出对非法占有的否定意义进行具体的研究。 第三，探讨合法支出对受贿罪量刑的意义，从理论角度论证合法支出属于占有后的处分行为，总结和分析合法支出对犯罪量刑的意义，并对量刑情节的界定方面应注意的问题以及合法支出作为受贿罪具体量刑情节的考量方面提出自己的看法。 第四，对受贿罪出罪机制的设定问题进行思考和研究，结合宽恕原则，讨论受贿罪出罪机制设立的合理性问题。从犯罪的价值理论角度，分析设立受贿罪出罪机制的意义并就赦免作为受贿罪出罪机制进行尝试性分析。

Bribery crime is a kind of specific bribery crime with a great social harm because it erodes the integrity of national civil servants. The government should take severe measures against bribery-taking crime.But how to deal with the issue of expenditure the illicit money on official affairs or public interests has not been written clearly in our criminal law as provisions. In 2007, the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate have published judicial interpretation to clear recognition and punishment for how to deal with the return of the reprocessing behavior after receiving the illicit money and goods; In 2016, the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate further regulated by issued judicial interpretation that legal expenditure behavior does not affect the establishment of bribery crime, but it can be considered as the discretionary circumstances.This fully indicates, legal expenses have no effect on the establishment of bribery crimes.Although it cannot be denied,such regulation are in line with the background of the new era and the policy requirements of the party and the country,but its rationality also has room for research and necessities.The research of this paper mainly includes the following four aspects: Firstly, the paper introduces “Wen jianmao Bribery Crime” which leads to the topic of the paper—“legal expenditure recognition”. The paper gives a brief summary and some evaluations of the dispute focus and verdict of the case, and also introduces the connotation and classification of legal expenditure and puts forward the dispute about this problem in the theoretical circle of criminal law, namely three doctrines. Secondly, the paper puts forward the opinion that the legal expenditure affects the essence of bribery crime establishment from the perspective of the legal expenditure and illegal possession. At the same time, analyses the significance of the influence of criminal constitution and conducts a concrete study on the negative meaning of legal expenditure on illegal possession. Thirdly, the paper discusses the meaning of legal expenditure for the discretion of bribery-taking punishment, theoretically proofs the legal expenditure is the punishment of “after the disposition”, Summarizes and analyzes the significance of legal expenditure on crime sentencing, and puts forward its own suggestions on the issues that should be paid attention to in defining the circumstances of sentencing and the consideration of legal expenditure as a specific sentencing condition of bribery crime. Fourthly, Thinking and researching on the setting problem of the crime of accepting bribes, and combines the principle of forgiveness to discuss the rationality of the establishment of the mechanism for the crime of accepting bribes. From the perspective of the value theory of crime, to analyze the significance of establishing the mechanism for crime of accepting bribes .