The Distinction Between The Crime Of Fraud In Fund Raising And The Crime Of Illegally Absorbing Public Deposits Empirical Analysis Of 97 Cases As Samples

Based on the analysis of 97 judicial documents of the second instance of the crime of fund-raising fraud and the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits,it is found that the crime of fund-raising fraud and the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits have common features in the mode of absorbing fund-raising,the psychology of the victims with high returns,and the inability to return the fund-raising.Although both crimes have the nature of illegal fund-raising objectively,they are easily confused in the objective aspects of whether to use fraud methods.When the two crimes are divided,the difference between the procuratorial organ,the defendant and the defender lies in the determination of the purpose of illegal possession.Public security,procuratorates and courts have different opinions on the nature of such cases,the key point is whether the defendant has "the purpose of illegal possession",it is also the core reason why it is difficult for judicial organs to grasp the boundary between the two crimes.The key to accurate division of the two crimes lies in the determination of "the purpose of illegal possession".There are some problems in practice,such as the lack of commercial characteristics and the conclusion is not unique;the sentencing of the two crimes is quite different,although the victim is at fault,it has not been mentioned;there are some problems such as insufficient theoretical evidence,difficult to accept defense opinions and so on.There are several reasons for these problems: first,the legislation and trial of "the purpose of illegal possession" do not pay attention to its unique commercial nature;second,there are some limitations in the application of judicial presumption,which makes the objective fact and subjective intention indistinguishable;third,the weak consciousness of the judge to commit a crime and the single current judicial evaluation standard result in the problems of difficult recognition of defense opinions and insufficient reasoning and so on.In order to correctly identify "the purpose of illegal possession" and accurately define the two crimes,the following paths are provided: first,combining positive and negative evidence,the defendant is given certain rights of negative evidence to ensure the uniqueness of the conclusion;second,the connotation of "the purpose of illegal possession" should be further defined and explained strictly;third,when trying illegal fund-raising cases,the courts should absorb professional jurors,pay attention to the commercial characteristics of the cases,and cultivate commercial thinking;fourth,implement the identification criteria of the unity of subjectivity and objectivity;fifth,the judges should identify it from multiple angles and reason for the identified part separately;sixth,the victim’s fault should be added as the sentencing circumstances applicable to the fund raiser.