Criminal Evaluation Of Middleman’s "Bribery Interception"

Middleman’s "bribery interception" is the behavior of intercepting property used for bribery as a middleman.Both judicial practice and criminal law scholars have different opinions on the nature of middleman’s "bribery interception".How to evaluate the this behavior more reasonably is a problem that needs to be solved.In-depth research on this behavior has theoretical value and practical significance.By analyzing and summarizing relevant judicial rulings,we can find that the crimes involved are relatively concentrated,and there are some differences in the identification of property and the amount of crime.Also,the level of attention of the trial courts to this behavior in different cases is significantly different.Therefore,it can be found that there are some deficiencies in judicial practice,like inadequate attention to "bribery interception",prominent issues of "different judgments in the same case",and inadequate response to the lawyers’ opinions.To solve the above problems,we need to put forward a convincing evaluation of the "bribery interception" behavior of middlemen.And,it is necessary to comment on the theoretical disputes concerned by the criminal law academics.There are two main issues involved: first,whether the property intended for bribery continues to be protected by criminal law.Second,how to determine the nature of the behavior of the briber to deliver the property to the middleman? Coming to conclusions after commenting on opinions: first,according to economic property,property intended to be used for bribery can be protected by criminal law and it is still the property protected by criminal law.;Second,the behavior of delivering property to the middleman is a commission for illegal reasons,not a payment for illegal reasons,and the briber will not lose the right to request return.Finally,on this basis,divide the middleman’s "bribery interception" behavior into three types: deceptive "bribery interception",temporary intentional "bribery interception" and acquiescent "bribery interception".Deceptive "bribery interception" includes the middleman’s inability and unwillingness to help,and the deception of middleman increase the "quote" of the bribe.These types of deceptive "bribery interception" should be considered fraud.In temporary intentional "bribery interception",the behavior of the middleman’s receiving the money but delivering less or keeping that all should be considered the crime of embezzlement.If a middleman intentionally intercepts the property,after the bribe objector refuses or returns the bribe,there is no need to determine the behavior as a crime separately,but the "bribery interception" behavior of the middleman should be a crime aggravating circumstance.Last,in acquiescent "bribery interception",the bribe payer actually acquiesced in this situation,so as an exception to the first two "bribery interception" types,it is not necessary to convict them separately.At this time,the middleman’s "bribery interception" is a part of the whole bribery crime,so it needs to be determined after the overall consideration.