Private Lending Dispute Punishment People Cross Case Study Practice Problem

The massive folk folk lending in China has a drink and historical origin, along with the development of The Times, the trial of cases involving private lending become more complicated. Careful when lending cases means of criminal law, accurately distinguish the differences of economic crime and normal lending, properly handle the folk lending dispute, should not only to maintain the country’s financial order, and to prevent excessive blow of normal folk lending practices. Should in line with the priority when dealing with private lending cases apply to adjust, as a last line of defense for criminal law, and analyzing the specific case in order to maximize the protection of the parties legitimate rights and interests shall be inviolable. To strictly apply the principle of legally prescribed punishment for a defendant, and strictly apply the principle of punishment is consistent, both to punish crime, and to protect the interests of the victim, in order to reveal the judicial justice.This article is divided into three partsIn the first part mainly introduces the folk lending disputes involving torture people cross the typical cases, the proposed punishment people cross case processing pattern choice, the protection of the rights issue. The second part is mainly to the folk lending dispute punishment people cross the case reality-first the punishment queen people argument processing pattern. First the punishment queen people respectively applicable situation were summarized in definition, origin, practice, summarized the theoretical circle first the punishment queen people debate. On the basis of the above-mentioned point of view to analyze, put forward the details of the author to torture people cross case handling.Third division focuses on informal lending dispute punishment people cross cases need to be aware of several concrete problems in practice. For the main body of the victim, the cognizance of the crime amount, loan contract effectiveness of identifying, the guarantor or the borrowers jointly responsibility and such cases running should be paid attention to in the situation, in the judgment in the case of recovered, returned goods should be paid attention to when some briefly analyzed on the concrete practice issues, such as, in order to my colleagues to correction.