| In the case of P2P-based fund-raising fraud, there exsits a great dispute on whether it constitutes the crime of illegally absorbing deposit of the public, fraud or fund-raising defraud.Through analysis of the dispute of the case, the key point of distinguishing the illegally absorbing deposit of the public and fund-raising defraud lays on whether the defendant has the purpose of illegal possession; and the key point of distinguishing the fraud and fund-raising defraud layson whether the defendant has the activity of fund-raising. This paper would demonstrate that the two defendants do not constitute the crime of illegally absorbing deposit of the public and fraud through analyzing the key element of the crime, and the two defendants constitute the crime of fund-raising defraud through analyzing the four elements of crime. The arguments are as follows:Firstly, the purpose of illegal possession does not constitute the crime of illegally absorbing deposit of the public. Identification of illegal possession is regulated by judicial interpretation. It permits the evidence to the contrary, and combines with its meaning to validate the presumption and disproof. And we use this method to identify that the two defendants have the purpose of illegal possession. Secondly, the activity of illegal fund-raising do not constitute the crime of fraud. The two defendants set up the platform of P2P and implemented the activity of fund-raising, and then they used the transformed P2P to financing is in line with the elements of illegal fund-raising. Thirdly, the two defendants constitute a fund-raising defraud. They are in line with the four element of the fund-raising defraud:the subject is a natural person; they have direct intention and purpose of illegal possession; they sabotaged the financial rules of a nation and violated the public and private property; they have the activity of fraud and illegal fund-raising. |
