The Distinction Between Professional Beating Dummy’s "Claim For Rights Protection" And The Crime Of Extortion

At present,the development of China’s market economy is in a period of promising strategic opportunities.Under the background of continuously optimizing the business environment and helping high-quality development.On the one hand,because we have constantly focused on the optimization of market order and strengthened the governance of illegal and criminal acts such as making and selling fake goods,we have achieved a series of positive results.On the other hand,we cannot be satisfied with the existing achievements,because the market environment is complex,our judicial and administrative resources are also limited,and many hidden places are difficult to be standardized.At this time,the "rights protection claim" behavior implemented by professional counterfeiters has played a certain auxiliary role,but the boundary between this behavior and the crime of extortion is controversial,and there are still many confusion in the behavior itself,which should be improved.This paper takes the boundary between the "rights protection claim" behavior of professional beating dummy and the crime of extortion as the research center.Specifically,it includes four parts: the first part is the overview of the "rights protection claim" behavior of professional beating dummy.First,define the "rights protection claim" behavior of professional beating dummy,specifically from the two levels of concept and characteristics.Then it introduces three different types of this behavior in practice,which delineates a clear scope for further discussion.The second part is the typical cases and the focus of controversy of the "rights protection claim" behavior of professional beating dummies.First,it introduces three typical cases,and expounds in detail the course of the case and the handling of the judicial organ.Then combined with the court judgment and theoretical theory,the dispute summarizes the focus of the dispute,including whether the professional crackdown on counterfeit goods has the identity of consumers,whether the claim process has the purpose of "illegal possession",whether the claim amount can be used as the boundary between crime and non crime,and whether the exposure and reporting method belong to the means of "threat and coercion",and summarizes the opinions of the supporting party and the opposing party in the focus of the dispute.The third part is the identification of the boundary between professional beating dummy "rights protection claim" and the crime of extortion.The first is the analysis of the key points of the crime of extortion,focusing on the controversial key issues in the focus,mainly including how to identify the purpose of illegal possession and the means of threat and coercion.Then it demonstrates that the "rights protection claim" behavior of professional beating dummy should not be recognized as the crime of extortion as a whole.Specifically,it demonstrates from four aspects: the professional beating dummy has the identity of consumer,the claim process does not have the "purpose of illegal possession",the claim amount can not be used as the boundary between crime and non crime,and the exposure and reporting methods do not belong to the means of "threat and coercion".The fourth part is the solution and related thinking of the above cases.First of all,due to the different judgments of the same case and similar cases in the above-mentioned cases,the errors in the judgment of the judicial organ should be corrected.Next,it puts forward that efforts should be made to uphold the modesty of criminal law,clarify the connotation of consumers,guide and standardize the "rights protection claim" behavior of professional beating dummies.