The Comparative Analysis Of The Crime Of Corruption And Embezzlement Of Publicfunds

In recent years, with the accelerating pace of restructuring of state-owned enterprises in China, many state-owned enterprise into a limited liability company shares, shareholders constitute a fundamental change, the concept of "national ownership" lost in the traditional sense.Many state-owned companies, enterprises, institutions, people’s organizations, to establish independent accounts in order to evade state taxes, set up illegal accounts, often private storage of "public funds".The laws of the lag caused by China’s "Criminal Law" is still defined in accordance with the traditional concept of national staff, national staff body identified in judicial practice has generated a lot of controversy and disagreement.Widespread public funds for personal memory phenomenon often been identified as the individual misappropriated, and correctly identified the national staff body, conviction and sentencing of corruption, embezzlement crime is essential.Suspected embezzlement of state holding shares of the Corporation’s general staff, to steal, to cheat, how qualitative processing misappropriation of company money, in theory, is not clear, judicial practice, practice different proposition to the crime of corruption, embezzlement of public fundsprocessing, also advocated to post embezzlement, misappropriation of funds handled, some simply prosecutors to prosecute crime finds what the crime.Accurate understanding of the theory, easy to practice unified identified, this article by instances of this problem were analyzed.This paper first introduces the two cases:LiDong Song corruption case, Guo Rong embezzlement case, hearing there is considerable controversy, which led to the author of the crime of corruption, embezzlement of public funds Rethinking the Crime. Secondly, the use of common crime constitution theory, focusing on comparative analysis between the constituent elements of the crime of corruption and embezzlement of public funds, and concluded that:similar to the subject of the two crimes are national staff; subjective aspect out direct intentional;the two offenses for implementation violated the integrity of the job behavior of state officials, and ownership of public property constitutes a certain violations.Different the two crimes subjective purpose and objective manifestations, at the same time, the object of a crime against criminal object.Caused by the reflection of the cases in this article the author of the theory of anticipated possibility of, and proposed to improve the crime of corruption, embezzlement of public funds body as well as the objective elements of the crime of corruption modify legislative proposals.