Study Crime Of Illegally Absorbing Public Deposits

In the national penal code, there is no provision to interpret the term of "illegal absorbing public savings" and "quasi-illegal absorbing public savings. The judiciary had followed the regulation from the state council and its agencies. The promulgation of The Supreme People’s Court interpretation of the specific application of the law of criminal cases on the trial of illegal fund-raising a number of issues(the application for short) made new and detailed judicial interpretation about the offense. Nevertheless, the application does not solve the issue once for all, and it raises academic concerns. This paper tries to interprete the offense from legislative history, crime constitution, the judicial judgment and legislation choice. This paper includes those main parts:Part one, the existence of this offense has experienced the process of being nothing to having some, from separate criminal code to national penal code and critique of the application. The significance of the application is that it redefines the offense in the name of criminal judiciary interpretation, and it has great practical importance. But the content of the application can not draw a bright line between the offense and other absorbing savings offenses. During the process of application, there are still some blurring zones.Part2, the analysis and confirmation of the constituent elements of this offense. It tries to analyze this offense from the subject, the object, the mens rea, and the actus reus. It confirms that unit that has the qualification to absorb public savings can be liable for the offense. The illegitimacy, the publicity, interest-oriented, and social characters can confirm the actus reus of the offense.It denies that publicity is one of the key elements of this offense, and the legal interest the government protects is the regulatory order of financial market.Part3, the judicial judgment of this offense. The differences between private lending, trust management and illegal deposits from the public. The similarities and differences of this offense and the offense of allowed to establish the crime of financial institutions, not issue stock, company, corporate bonds offense, in order to give a more precise definition of this offense.Part4, The legislation and decriminalization of the this offense. There is no bright line, it is unfit for the contemporary judicial environment. The legislative should change the attitude toward this offense. This offense should be narrowly construed, and judicial reform should be on its way concurrently.