Study Of A Number Of Controversial Issues Of Large Amounts Of Property From Unidentified Sources

Along with the continuous deepening of the economic and political system reform, the situation of economic crime by taking advantage of duty is becoming more complex and more diversiform. In order to meet the needs of punishment on corruption crime, the crime of holding a huge sum of property with unidentified sources has been established in the course of opening and reform history. Because prescribing it in the criminal law establishment was not lasting long, the related theory research on it is not ready. From the beginning of setup, it has been the focus of legislative and judicial body. Now it is recognized as the most controversial accusation, a lot of problem about it is under disputed, such as concrete accusation, legislation value, constitution of the crime, presumption of guiltiness, criminal pattern, burden of proof, voluntary surrender, amount, legally-prescribed punishment, etc. A master thesis can not have a systematic and entire study on the crime of holding a huge sum of property with unidentified sources, this paper mainly discusses the most controversial problems about it in order to make a better research on this problems.This paper mainly discusses five following problems of the crime of holding a huge sum of property with unidentified sources. Firstly, the problem about legislation value is researched. Namely the establishment of it is justified or not. Based on the legislative backdrops and the related provision of existing law, the paper figures that although the establishment is utilitarian, but it is justified, can not be canceled, and should be being perfected. By analyzing two points of views within the theory groups on whether exists in the crime of holding a huge sum of property with unidentified sources, and describes general and special voluntary surrender. Thirdly, the problem about determination of joint crime is considered. The study points out there presence act manner of joint crime and omission manner of joint. Fourthly, the problem about burden of proof is analyzed. The paper considers that although the burden of proof on prosecutorial organizations is reduced, but the burden of proof is still taken on prosecutorial organizations, "the inversion for burden of proof" or "shifting the burden of proof" is not existed on the suspect and defendant. Finally, the problem about perfecting legislation is studied. The paper points out some disadvantages in legislation of it, and reviews the legally-prescribed punishment of it, and gives useful advises in perfecting legislation.