Qualitative The Possessing Behavior Of One-man Company’s Shareholders

As the growing number of one-man company,the particularity of one-man company gradually highlight.Such as whether the shareholders of one-man company is the subject of embezzlement, how to qualitative the possessing behavior of the one-man company’s shareholders.These problems cause dispute both in theory and practice.Combining with the real case,through to debate focus of discussion--- "whether the shareholders of one-man company is the subject of embezzlement",to solve the problem of "how to qualitative the possessing behavior of the one-man company’s shareholders",and rethink the relevant laws,legislative interpretation, judicial interpretation. Full text is made of four parts:The first part is the basic situation of the case.This section contains the cause of action,the introduction of case,focus of discussion,disagreement.focus on analysis of how to qualitative the possessing behavior of the one-man company’s shareholders.summing up the controversial focus of the case,whether the shareholders of one-man company is the subject of embezzlement.At the same time,spread the focus of this debate,explored how to qualitative the possessing behavior of the one-man company’s shareholders.The second part is the legally analysis of related problems.Focus on the disagreement,discussing the contention of this part.first of all,from the view of Method profit violation,analysis "whether the shareholders of one-man company is the subject of embezzlement".Second,to qualitative the possessing behavior of the one-man company’s shareholders.Putting forward a view--the shareholders of one-man company is the subject of embezzlement.but according to the different subjective content, "the possessing behavior of the one-man company’s shareholders" may constitute a crime of "capital flight crime", "misappropriation of funds" and "tax evasion",etc.The third part is the case analysis and conclusion.This part base on the second part of the legal analysis,combined with the specific case,made a conclusion of yu’s behavior.The fourth part is the learning of this case.This part is rethinking the legislation of “embezzlement” and “capital flight crime”.Believes in "embezzlement’s legislation " part should combine with the special regulation of one-man company;In the part of "capital flight crime",should cancel the Legislative interpretation that narrowed the scope of application of “capital flight crime”.