A Study On The Criminal Nature Of The Behavior Of Making A Visit For Money

With the continuous development of modernization in our country,the frequent occurrence of noisy cases has aroused extensive discussion in the theoretical and practical circles.Because of the general characteristics of "cause for cause",and the Constitution and laws and regulations of letters and visits stipulate that citizens have the right to express their demands to the relevant government departments or exercise supervision.However,due to the imperfection of the letters and visits system in China,the staff in charge of letters and visits in the government departments bear a huge pressure of letters and visits assessment,which urges some people to use the letters and visits as a means Take the opportunity to ask for property from the government or its staff.In judicial practice,the criminal nature of the case of making a visit is usually dealt with by the crime of provocation,the crime of extortion or innocence.The author analyzes different qualitative disputes through the cases of judicial practice,so as to summarize different qualitative demarcation standards.There are different understandings about the criminal nature of the behavior.According to the meaning of the two key concepts of "petition" and "claim for property",the behavior of "petition for property" can be defined as the behavior that the petitioner abuses the right of petition stipulated in the petition regulations,expresses his own appeal in an illegal way,and threatens or coerces the local government and its staff to ask for property in the name of "continuous petition" or in the process of petition by extreme means.Based on the analysis of the external characteristics and appeal basis of the means of making a fuss,this paper points out that the behavior of making a fuss to seek wealth has the characteristics of diversity,excesses,antecedents,purposes and means of causality.According to the legitimacy of the petitioner’s claim,the behavior can be divided into the behavior based on the legitimate claim and the behavior without the legitimate claim,so as to put forward the corresponding qualitative standards according to whether the actor has the legitimacy of the claim.As to whether or not the behavior of asking for money is a crime,the negative point of view holds that the behavior of asking for money has its antecedent nature,and the gap between the behavior of asking for money and the government organ is too large in power and status.Starting from the modesty of criminal law,it should be determined that it does not constitute a crime.The positive view is that the troublemakers use excessive means to pressure the government to ask for property,and they have the intention of illegal possession subjectively.For example,there is no legal basis for asking for property or the asking for property obviously exceeds their due rights and interests,and their behavior certainly violates the property crime in the criminal law.As for the behavior of extorting property by making a visit which constitutes the crime of creating a quarrel and causing trouble,the dispute points are whether it is necessary to have the "hooligan motive" subjectively and whether the means of making a visit destroy the social order;as for the behavior of making a visit to extorting property which constitutes the crime of extorting property,the dispute points are whether the government can become the victim of extorting and whether the government has to pay property or not.As for the guilt and innocence,we should treat it dialectically.We should not only affirm that some cases of making a visit to claim money have reasonable demands,but also recognize the social harmfulness of the means of making a visit.Therefore,we should divide the guilt and innocence from the legitimacy of the purpose of making a visit,the necessity of the means and the rationality of the claim,and conclude the conditions of finding innocence;as for the cases of making a visit to claim money,we should define them as the crime of making trouble,Subjectively,it is not required to consider that the actor has rogue motive,but the behavior has elements of destroying social order,and the actor does not have the legitimacy of claiming rights,the illegality of means and the less of extorting money;in the identification of extorting crime,the government can be the object of extorting,and the payment of property by the government based on the means of extorting is forced,so the behavior In order to achieve the degree of extortion or threat stipulated in the crime of extortion,in addition,it is necessary to comprehensively consider whether there is a factual basis for the petitioner’s demands,the intensity of the means of petitioning,and whether the victim is threatened or coerced so as to be forced to deliver property.