Exploration On The Standard Of Property Loss Of Fraud Crime

The crime of fraud is an important crime in crimes against property.In the past,scholars mainly focused on the behavior of the crime of fraud.As everyone knows,the status of "property loss" in the crime of fraud and the establishment of the crime of fraud are also unknown.Had a crucial impact.Studying the criteria for identifying property losses in the crime of fraud,and then determining the standards,can provide a new idea for the study of the crime of fraud.Therefore,this article takes this as an important proposition and discusses it in order to provide academic theory and judicial practice with Value advice.This article is mainly divided into five parts:The first part is the elaboration of the litigation caused by property loss in the determination of fraud in judicial practice and its current status in criminal law.In judicial practice,there are a large number of cases that need to be qualitatively judged by judging whether the property is lost,such as double fraud cases where fraudulently obtained effective guarantees for re-fraud,donation fraud cases,use of office facilities for property transfer cases,etc..Although there are many such cases,often the same or similar cases will lead to different results in practice.If the analysis can be made from the perspective of property loss,it will be of great help to determine the nature of the case.In fact,in the judgment of whether the property loss is an objective constitutive element of the crime of fraud,there is a dispute between "don’t say property loss" and "necessity to say property loss".Germany,Italy,France and other countries have clearly stipulated the elements of "property damage" in the provisions of criminal law,while Japan,Russia and other countries do not.China’s criminal lawdoes not explicitly consider property loss as a prerequisite for the crime of fraud,but only stipulates a "large amount",indicating that the provisions on property loss are in a relatively vague state.Through analysis,the viewpoint of the theory of the necessity of property loss is more in line with the current regulations and doctrine development trends of fraud crimes in China and should be adopted.The second part is about the nature of property loss and the content of its judgment.Clarifying the nature of property losses helps to define the scope of property losses,thereby limiting the scope of application of the crime of fraud.In addition to the three more traditional theoretical viewpoints of the property theory of law,the property theory of economy and the property theory of law and economy,in recent years,some new ideas have emerged regarding property loss,such as the loss of human property Point of view,substantial property loss,property loss among subjects.The property theory of the law focuses on the provisions of the law,and believes that the judgment of property losses should be based on the provisions of civil law;the economic property theory is more concerned about the existence of objective economic property losses,which is a purely objective judgment method;The property theory,the advantages of the property law of the gaming law and the economic property theory,not only preserve the characteristics of judging objective economic losses,but also take into account the provisions of the law,effectively limiting the scope of property losses;people’s property losses are concerned with the The issue of whether or not property related to human development is lost.The concept and content of property loss vary widely.The object of fraud and the scope of punishment represented by each doctrine are quite different,which also affect the determination and judgment of property loss.The legal and economic property theory after integration can take into account both objective economic property and legal requirements,which is more reasonable.The third part is the explanation of the identification of property loss and the discussion of its rationality.When determining the specific circumstances of property loss,there are several main viewpoints in theory: individual property theory,substantial individual property theory,overall property theory,and the theory of purpose failure.In the same type of cases,the application of different views You will get a completely different answer.Some scholars believe that the identification of property losses in different situations sometimes does not apply the same standard,and different situations need to be analyzed differently.Especially in the case of donation fraud,many scholars advocate the purpose failure theory or the modified purpose failure theory.They believe that in such cases,the donor who assumes the obligation of unilateral payment cannot obtain any objective economic compensation,so it only needs to Consider whether the purpose of the donor is achieved.The individual property theory of the form considers that the delivery of the property is the loss of property.The substantial individual property theory concerns the objective economic loss of the individual property and the realization of the subjective purpose.The overall property theory needs to determine both the objective economic property and the subjective transaction purpose.Whether or not there is a loss can be ruled out if and only if there are no losses on both sides.Determining which method can be reasonably applicable to various cases is the key to this article.The fourth part mainly discusses how to apply theoretical doctrines to solve practical problems in the three basic types of transactions,the most important of which is how to identify the treatment of benefits.In the transactions between the two parties,the identification of property losses is generally easy,but there are also some special cases,the focus is on how to judge the objective economic loss.For example,after an actor obtains an effective guarantee from a third party through fraud,and then effectively guarantees the double fraud of the counterparty of the fraud transaction,there is a large controversy in theory and practice.In the case of unilaterally-paid donations,if the purpose of the donor is a mixed purpose,it will have a certain degree of influence on the judgment of property loss,which has become a question worthy of further discussion.In mixed transactions,the situation is even more complicated.It combines the purpose of economic transactions and the purpose of social charity.The mixture of the two makes the judgment of the case more difficult.This section of this article gives a more comprehensive explanation of how these three types of cases are identified as a combination of property losses.The last part is a summary of how property damage is determined in all types of cases.The content of the overall property theory actually covers the method of solving donation fraud cases,and there is no need to specifically apply other theories to explain a specific type of case.The application of different treatment principles in different situations poses a certain degree of threat to the certainty of the criminal law.This article illustrates some typical cases that are more controversial in theory andpractice to explain how to apply the overall property loss consistently Theory to solve the problem of property loss in various types of fraud.The application of a more uniform identification standard has strengthened the clarity of the criminal law,which is of great significance for both theoretical research and practical operation.