Research On The Difficult Issues Of The Crime Of Fraudulent Fund-Raising

In the process of the research of the crime of fraudulentfund-raising, the three key elements involved are the fraudmethod, illegal fund raising, the purpose of illegalpossession, witch determinations affect the establishment ofthe crime of fraudulent fund-raising.The differences between the "fraud" of the fraud methodof the crime of fraudulent fund-raising and "deceive" are notonly reflected in the emphasis of the meaning, but also in theadditional emotional intensity. The "fraud" pays moreattention to the result of behavior, at the same time theadditional emotional intensity and negative evaluation comefrom society are stronger. The "frauds" of the crime offraudulent fund-raising and the crime of fraud have obviouslydifferences, but they come down in one continuous line. In "WuYing case", according with the "1996Interpretation" torecognition the using of fraud method. The coexistence of the number of don’t close plots from the case fact determinewhether Wu Ying has used the method of fraud. The definitionof fraud method in the "1996Interpretation" not only doesn’treflect the coherent relation between the crime of fraudulentfund-raising and the crime of fraud, but also imposes the"false supporting documents as bait" and "high returns as bait"on together, and the start time for using fraud means thereis no clear, according to above problems, It is necessary toredefine the fraud method under the meticulous clear principle.The redefine the fraud method not only effectively solves theabove problems, and should adopt the way of enumeration torules.By criminal law to punish illegal fund-raising shall beincluded in the scope of internal financing and exceed thescope of the approved illegal fund raising. The differencesbetween raising funds illegally and folk lending include thesubjective purpose, the interest, and the scope of the objectobviously. The sides of the controversial point lies in whether the behavior oriented object as "public" about “Wu Ying case”of illegal fund raising, the final court ruled that Wu Ying’sbehavior conforms to the specific. The “Wu Ying case”reflects the dilemma faced by the illegal fund raising:"public" standard is not clear, all kinds of standards of"illegal fund-raising" fragmented and fuzzy rules. Takemeasures to improve the plight of illegal fund raising-todefine and standardize the illegal fund raising. On one hand,alter the "public" further clarity, consider the factors anddetermine whether illegal fund raising including friends andrelatives, refer to the "safe haven" system in the UnitedStates to consider the actual situation of the victim anddefines the "public" should around " specified" and "majority".On the other hand, make the define standards more clearly,unify specification standards and the market and thegovernment should play their role in the regulation of illegalfund raising.The meanings of the "possession" of illegal possession purpose and ownership in civil law are same, which is meaningpermanent deprivation of ownership. There are many forms ofpurposes, the illegal possession has a kind of legal andindirect purpose. The way of the recognition of the illegalpossession purpose should be judicial presumption under thepremise of subjective and objective unification. According tothe "2010Interpretation" standards, the circumstances of thecrime that conform to the standards can be found in "Wu Yingcase" difficultly. The”Wu Ying case” reflects confuses intheory of criminal law and in practice of the”2010Interpretation”. The confuse In theory of criminal lawinclude the standard of recognition of the purpose of illegalpossession of the crime of fraudulent fund-raising deviatesfrom the basic theory of intentional and crime number shapein criminal law, and the confuses in practice include thestandards in the "2010Interpretation " tend to be objectiveimputation and the "2010Interpretation " makes more difficultfor recognizing the crime of fraudulent fund-raising. After summarizing confuses of the purpose of illegal possession,what should be considered is how to realize the accuratelypositioning of the purpose of illegal possession. First of all,in the process of accurately defining the purpose of illegalpossession should follow the basic theory of criminal law,secondly, in the recognition of the purpose of illegalpossession should insist on the principle of subjective andobjective unity, and the last but not least, limit thepresumption of the purpose of illegal possession to Avoid theexpanding of the purpose.