| It is a thorny issue to deal with cases where crime of corruption and bribery are interweaved together. Among those cases, Quan’s corruption case is a representative one. This case is a rather controversial one in practice, that whether Quan’s crime is corruption or bribery lies in how we construe the nature of time spot. This thesis, proceeded from Quan’s standing, emphasizes on how to distinguish Quan’s behavior being corruption or bribery, and takes Quan’s case as an example to conduct a deep analysis on the punishment fits this kind of crime, so as to make a contribution to the precise identification of this kind of crime in juridical practice.This thesis consists of four chapters, about 22200 characters.Chapter one: fundamental state of the case. It spreads through four aspects: First, cause of action. That is Quan’s corruption case. Second, an introduction of details of the case, giving a detailed introduction of Quan’s case. Third, disputes. The disputes of this case mainly concentrate on the qualitative study of Quan’s behavior; the public prosecution organ takes Quan’s behavior as corruption, while the judicial apparatus deems it as bribery, Quan and his pleader regard it as non-state functionary’s acceptance of bribery. Fourth, focus of disputes, there are three disputes in the case as in the following: first, is Quan a state functionary; second, had Quan use the convenience of his position; third, how to determine the nature of time spot.Chapter two: Jurisprudence analysis on relevant issues about this case and affirmation verdict. Being the key point of this thesis, this chapter stresses on discoursing upon theoretically the disputes mentioned in Chapter two. In this case, there lies two issues to be settled to identify Quan’s subject position: the one is whether Quan is an employee of state-owned public institute, the other is whether Quan belongs to those who engage themselves in public business. This thesis emphatically interprets the stipulations of “those who engage themselves in public business in state-owned public institutes” under article 93 criminal law, to prove that Quan’s subject identity conforms to state functionary. The author considers that “engaging in public” must satisfy two characteristics: the duty behavior possesses manageability and national representativeness. Whether Quan’s duty behavior possesses the above two characteristics is to be decided by specific circumstances where he takes advantage of his position. To distinguish exactly the crime of corruption and bribery, the nature of property, that is the nature of time spot, involved in this case must be considered. The nature of time spot mentioned in this case determines the content of Quan’s behavior object and job convenience. The author thinks that to correctly understand the nature of time spot, we cannot stick to its literal meaning, actually, time spot refers to the anticipated profit of radio and television group, it is a public property of state-owned public institutes.Chapter three: analysis and conclusion of this case. Through analysis on the disputes mentioned in chapter two, the author reaches the decision that Quan’s behavior of peculating national property by way of perpetrating a fraud shall be convicted as corruption. For He(someone’s surname) offered significant help to Quan in the corruption, he shall be punished as accomplice; in consideration of his subordinate position in the case, he shall be decided as accessary.Chapter four: the insight from the research on this case. By the analysis on this case, the author thinks determining the nature of cases like this one---crime of corruption and bribery interweaved together, shall follow the following three steps: first, to strictly distinguish the two kinds of crime in accordance with the constitutive elements; second, to consider the origin of a chose in possession and nature of money; third, when crime of corruption and bribery overlap, the heavier offence shall prevail. |
PDF Full Text Request