The Influence Of Intervening Factors On The Determination Of Usury Loaning Crime

The research object of this paper is a real case of usury in reality.There are different opinions on how to deal with the case.Through the analysis of the divergent opinions,it is found that the divergent opinions are due to different understanding of the role and function of the intervention factors in the case.Therefore,it needs to be analyzed.This paper first theoretically analyzes how to judge the role of intervention factors in the crime of usury and the function of intervention factors in the crime of usury.Then it analyzes the role of intervention factors in the case by using relevant theories.After determining the role of intervention factors,it draws a conclusion on the specific function,From this case,we can get the enlightenment to the determination of the criminal of usury loan.The text is divided into three chaptersChapter one: the basic situation of the case.Including the brief introduction of the case and different opinions,the case is a real case,but there are three different opinions in the process of trial.Through the analysis of the three kinds of divergent opinions,it is found that the focus of the divergent opinions lies in the different understanding of the role of intervention factors in the case and the specific function in the usury loan,so it needs to be analyzed.Chapter two: this chapter is a theoretical analysis of how to judge the role of intervention factors in the crime of usury and the function of intervention factors in the crime of usury.First of all,the author makes a theoretical analysis on how to judge the role of intervention factors in the crime of usury,which involves the analysis and selection of some mainstream theories of causality.After sorting out and analyzing the conditional theory,equivalent causality theory and objective imputation theory,the three theories have their own advantages and disadvantages.The author’s opinion is to adopt the theoretical model of "conditional theory + equivalent causality theory" to judge the role of intervention factors.After that,through the analysis of the crime of usury,the author theoretically defines the specific function of intervention factors in the crime of usury.Chapter three: this chapter uses the theoretical model of "condition theory +equivalent causality theory" selected by the author after the theoretical analysis of the previous chapter to analyze the role of intervention factors in this case.The first is about the determination of the intervention factors in this case.Through the analysis,it is concluded that Zhao’s prosecution behavior,the behavior of the "third party" court and the public security bureau are the intervention factors in this case,while sun’s report behavior does not belong to the intervention factors in this case.Then it analyzes the role of various intervention factors in the second question,so as to determine the role of intervention factors in this case.After clarifying the role of intervention factors in the case,the case conclusion is drawn according to the specific functions of the previous analysis.At the same time,the author can draw such a conclusion by analyzing the situation in judicial practice.Because quite a lot of usury cases in practice are similar to this case,they are packaged as "private lending disputes" and thus enter into the field of civil litigation,which will involve the same judgment on the role of prosecution and court behavior,Therefore,the conclusion of this case can be used for reference by other similar usury cases.