Judicial Determination Of The Crime Of "Routine Loan" ——Taking The Crime Of Fraud By Ma Mou,and Others As An Example

In recent years,the economic situation has been advancing by leaps and bounds,and social capital has been operating rapidly.In order to meet the diverse needs of financing and investment,private lending activities have become increasingly active,and many illegal and criminal acts under the guise of private lending have also been generated that openly "trick" other people’s property.Regarding the crackdown on "routine loan" crimes,although the two high schools and the two ministries have issued relevant regulations,they have not resolved the problems of difficult characterization of such cases,inaccurate convictions,and difficulty in determining the number of crimes.This paper studies the above-mentioned problems through the discussion of the case,combined with the discussion of such cases in the theoretical and practical circles.The article mainly has the following four parts:The first part is the introduction.The background of the rapid development of my country’s "routine loan" in recent years is expounded,and the research purpose and significance of this subject are obtained.Explore new paths through case analysis,literature research and other methods to provide theoretical support for better combating "routine loan" crimes.The second part is the introduction of the case and the sorting out of the focus of the dispute.Dividing the criminal facts involved in this case into three types according to the behavior patterns and analyzing them,it is concluded that the focus of the dispute in this case mainly has the following two points: one is whether this case should be identified as a "routine loan" as a whole;the other is whether this case should be It was found that the crime of fraud and the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble were combined and punished.The third part is the comprehensive analysis of the case.Based on the analysis of the abovementioned disputed focus,through the demonstration of the identification standard of "routine loan",it is concluded that there is a type of criminal fact in this case that does not constitute "routine loan",so it cannot be identified as "routine loan" as a whole,otherwise it will violate the crime and punishment fit principle.Regarding the analysis of the charges in this case,the reasons given by the procuratorate and the court for the determination of the charges are unreasonable,and the determination of the charges of "routine loan" in judicial practice is mostly based on the "Opinions" formulated by the two high schools and two departments,and not based on strict deductive reasoning.Reasoning does not conform to the logic of syllogism.This article analyzes the elements of the crime strictly in accordance with the principle of statutory crime and punishment,and concludes that the defendant in this case was convicted of the crime of fraud and the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble.The fourth part is thinking and suggestions.Due to factors such as the diversity of means and time duration of the crime,the perpetrator does not carry out a single criminal act in the whole process,and there is no uniform applicable standard for the number of crimes involved in the "routine loan" crime in judicial practice.This leads to differences in the determination of the number of crimes in judicial practice.Therefore,after some thought on this,it is suggested that when determining the number of crimes,it is necessary to first judge whether the crimes are based on the same illegal purpose,and then see whether the infringement of legal interests exceeds the scope of its protection,and then judge whether it belongs to the absorption of the crime based on the specific behavior of the perpetrator.,implicated offender,imaginary coopetition and other crime number theory to analyze.In addition,for the idea of "routine loan" crime determination,the current laws and regulations are sufficient for judicial organs to make an accurate determination,and there is no need to add crimes such as the crime of illegal lending or the crime of "routine loan" fraud.Instead,judgments must be made in strict accordance with the principle of legality of crimes and punishments,and the current laws and regulations need to be summarized and improved to provide unified adjudication rules for judicial practice.