The Legal Analysis Of Pengximou’s Case Of Selling Fake And Inferior Products

This paper is based on a controversial case in judicial practice,because of the dispute between the prosecution and the defense and the different understanding of the applicable law between the two chambers.Thus leads to the sale of fake and inferior products in the theoretical and practical application of the problem worth pondering.The defendant,Peng,was a legal representative of Lanzhou Railway material Co.,Ltd.From 2013 to 2015,Peng was able to purchase various scrap railway vehicle parts at a low price through informal channels.New products to sell to the Lanzhou Railway Bureau Depot and Lanxi locomotive depot.The dispute in this case is a epitome of the concrete application of the crime of selling fake and inferior products in the judicial practice,which reflects the differences of views of the crime in the criminal law theory.In the process of trial,the controversy over the sale of fake and shoddy products by Pengximou mainly focuses on five aspects: one is that the case constitutes the crime of contract fraud or the crime of selling fake and inferior products,whether or not the two crimes are to be established as imaginative competition;The second is that the defendant is the legal representative of Lanzhou double Railway material Co.,Ltd.,whether the individual crime or the unit crime is established in this case;third,the dispute exists between the prosecution and defense sides about the specific sales amount of the fake and inferior electric circuit board parts in the second case.Fourth,Peng has always vigorously denied that he knew about the fake and inferior products he sold,but the public prosecution authorities thought that Peng could not have known it;fifthly,whether the product quality appraisal organization and the appraiser in this case have the relevant qualifications,The prosecution and the defense hold different opinions on whether the sampling detection procedure is illegal,and it is helpful for the conviction and sentencing of the crime in judicial practice to analyze and clarify these theoretical disputes.The author believes that by using the two-class theory of criminal constitution and the theory of imaginative concurrence,Peng’s behavior constitutes the crime of selling fake and inferior products rather than the crime of contract fraud,nor does it constitute theimaginative concurrence of the two crimes.With regard to the amount of money sold and the subjective aspects of the perpetrator,it is advisable to refer to the opinions of the public prosecution authorities and apply the standard of criminal evidence and the rules of criminal presumption to determine that the number of used circuit boards involved in the second case is 29 instead of only 13.Peng so-and-so on the sale of fake and inferior products should be well-known.In the identification of the subjectmatter involved in the case,the evidence validity of the two identification certificates should be recognized,but the two identification certificates should be regarded as belonging to the expert opinion and the witness testimony respectively.Through the analysis of the case of Pengximou selling fake and inferior products,this paper aims to find out the theoretical agreement that conforms to the legal basis and the current situation of judicial practice,and provides some humble opinions on the perfection of the criminal legislation of this crime.The aim is to punish crime more effectively and to safeguard the orderly operation of the market economy and the legal rights and interests of the main body of the market economy.