Research On The Demarcation Of The Contract Fraud Crime

In the practice of criminal justice, there are always some cases that are related to the criminal law and the civil law. Especially in recent years, with the development of market economy, the crime of contract fraud is more and more rampant and harmful. So it is necessary that research on the contract fraud crime from the perspective distinction between the criminal law and civil law in the theory and practice. Firstly,it is beneficial to analyze the problems about civil law and criminal law specifically and clearly;Secondly,it is propitious to clear the standards and principles between contract fraud, contract dispute and civil fraud further. Thirdly,it is further conducive to identify the criminal and civil liability issues in the cases which cross civil law and criminal law.This paper is based on the legal facts of the contract fraud case which cross the civil law and criminal law,and divide contract fraud cases which cross the civil law and criminal law to different types. On the whole, the two kinds of competition and cross are divided.The competing types cases which cross civil law and criminal law are divided the concurrence of law and the judgment of the competition;corss types cases which cross civil law and criminal law are divided internal and external cross.On the base of classification,it is emphasize the study of responsibility confirmation for this four kinds of contract fraud cases which cross the civil law and criminal law.The first part analyzes the cognizance of the liability of the actor in the case of the contract fraud on the part of the contract. Firstly,the characteristics of contract fraud and contract fraud are described and analyze the relationship and differences between of them. Further analysis of the distinction between contract fraud and contract fraud,the principle and method of contract dispute. In such cases, consideration should be given to the principle of modesty of criminal law, the value of the criminal law, the principle of combining qualitative and quantitative. And from the behavior of people have the sincerity of the contract, the time of the illegal possession of the time, the degree of social harm to distinguish contract fraud and contract fraud.In the second part, it analyzes the liability of the actor in the legal contract fraud cases which cross the civil law and criminal law. In the case of legal contract fraud which cross the civil law and criminal law, the behavior of person in addition to the criminal liability of the contract fraud, the civil liability should be borne, Because the contract is not of course invalid because of the behavior of the perpetrator of the crime of fraud, but the contract can changed or revoked.In the third part, it analyzes the liability of the actor in the case of the involvement of the internal contract fraud. The contract fraud, which is implemented by the personnel, can be divided into two cases. The first case is in accordance with the meaning of the unit of decision making or decision making organs, in the name of the unit to sign a contract, and to obtain the property of the unit in all cases. The purpose of this kind of behavior is to cheat property for unit, and should constitute unit crime. The second is the directly responsible persons in charge in the unit or the other persons who are directly responsible for the pursuit of personal interests, sign contract in the name of unit and will cheat property accounted for himself. In the case of criminal responsibility, this kind of situation should be considered as a crime of natural persons.The fourth part analyzes the responsibility of the perpetrator in the case of the involvement of the external contract fraud which cross the civil law and criminal law. In the case of the involvement of the external nature of the contract fraud cases based on security. If the guarantor knows that the actor has the intention of illegal possession of the other party’s property in the subjective, and still provides the false guarantee to help the people to achieve the purpose of the contract, the guarantor and the perpetrator constitute an accomplice in the crime of contract fraud; If the guarantor dose not know the purpose of the contract fraud and lead to the guarantor to bear the loss of the contract in the end,the master contract constitute contract fraud.