On The Judicial Determination Of The Crime Of Raising Funds From Wu Ying 's Case

How to identify the crime of fraud, has been one of the difficult problems in thecriminal law of our country, especially with China’s financial industry development,China’s small and medium enterprises to seek the development of space, often rushinto danger, from the folk financing, in its business failure, unable to return the goods,usually taken for fraud the accusation, formed the "do not trouble is the folk financing,an accident is fraud" judicial chaos.The Wu Ying case, in addition to the introduction, is divided into five parts, a totalof about23000words.The first part of this sequence of events on the Wu Ying case are introducedbriefly, analyzes the differences of opinion on both sides of the Wu Ying case, andaccording to the differences of opinion summarizes four controversial points in thispaper, namely the borrowing behavior of Wu Ying should be identified as ecru groupbehavior or Wu Ying individual behavior; crime of fraud behavior whether the objecthas a reasonable limits; behavior that its use to others in borrowing, whether canexplain the behavior of people use the fraud; provide a real and effective guarantee ofrepayment and Wu Ying has been actively for the creditors, whether can negate actorhas the purpose of illegal possession defenses.The second part of the article focuses on the controversial focus of the first partdiscusses about how to view, and elements of the controversial issues were necessarydefinition from the crime of fraud and. From the objective elements of crime of fraudin financing, because the crime of fraud is often carried out in the name of unit,defining the reasonable fund-raising fraud in the individual crime or the unit crime isof great practical significance. In addition, what is "illegal gathering" and "fraud"?These problems in the judicial practice has not been unified understanding. The crimeof fraud in the "purpose of illegal possession" and other property type crime of"illegal possession" generally said to have the same meaning, so in its grasp should bespecifically identified for the purpose of illegal possession of the property crime incontent with.The reasonable definition of around the second part of the third part of the article, combined with the Wu Ying case analysis step by step, that part of the loan behaviorof Wu Ying belongs to the unit behavior, Wu Ying does not have the purpose of illegalpossession, nor the use of fictitious facts to conceal the truth, means, therefore, WuYing does not constitute the crime of fraud.In the fourth part, through the Wu Ying case draws inspiration. Wu Ying case hascaused so much controversy, the main reason lies in the interpretation of constitutiondepartments in our judicial practice on the crime of fraud in financing is not verystrict, even there are many misunderstanding caused the misunderstanding of criminallaw. Wu Ying’s behavior is the folk financing behavior is fraud. China does not payattention to how to distinguish between the two, based on this problem and putsforward the distinction between civil financing and capital raising fraud personalopinion; and the combination of the current financial situation of our country, somesuggestions for perfecting the financing behavior of the.