Private Detective Should Be Outlawed, But Does Not Constitute The Crime Of Illegal Business

In recent years, the terms of the crime of illegal business of plugging becauseof its high degree of generality of judicial interpretation freely expansion has caused agreat deal of impact on the maintenance of the stability and authority of the criminallaw. Private detective as a new phenomenon in our country, and to expand the natureof the investigation caused extensive discussion of the theoretical circles. In this paper,by choosing a "private detective illegal conduct survey activities is sentenced to thecrime of illegal business operations" of the real case as a starting point to determinethe Criminal Code Article225Item4"other severely disrupt the market order ofillegal business behavior," the Ought meaning to the nature of the document issued bythe Ministry of Public Security and local judiciary, in order to determine whether thebehavior of the private detective in the case should rise to the criminal law to regulate.I hope to give subsequent judicial practice in the treatment of similar cases providesome meaningful reference.Paper is divided into four parts:The first part describes the main merits. In April2009, Lee et al "inreconnaissance the Zell Commerce Co., Ltd. registered actually doing business"private detective ". In July2009, Lee and others to accept Zhang commissionedinvestigation opened by Hwang Zhang’s car had gone disappeared attitude. Lee, whotrack way to find the place where Hwang, Hwang illegal detention. Police in theinvestigation of this case and found that Lee, who also used the eavesdropping stolenphotos, tracking, positioning, and other specialized equipment to help othersinvestigate spouses or couples with or without "having an affair", debt collection andother activities.The second section summarizes the cases the controversial viewpoint withthe focus of controversy. The controversy mainly focused on three: first, how tounderstand "in violation of state regulations? Second, the "other behavior" seriouslydisrupted the market order, meaning and scope? Third, how should one interpret thecircumstances are serious, the crime of illegal business?The third part is the analysis of the jurisprudence of the focus of the disputein this case. The first analysis of the scope of state regulations "and that the casesbased on the Ministry of Public Security" notice of non-governmental organizations on the Prohibition of the creation of the "private detective" nature "does notbelong to the state regulations, Lee, who does not act in violation of state regulations;second is the analysis of the meaning and scope of "other illegal operations thatseriously disrupted the market order", that is to prevent the violation of the principleof legality, should illegal operations that are defined in the following situations: First,a violation of the legislature specified can be held criminally responsible (subsidiaryof the Criminal Code), is a violation of a clearly defined by the State Council can beinvestigated for criminal liability in accordance with the law, is a violation of thehighest judicial organ of the provisions can be held criminally responsible the crimeof illegal business judicial interpretation. Lee et al. Behavior does not meet any of theabove circumstances, the law enforcement and judicial organs in Beijing which thisbehavior is not entitled to the provisions of illegal business behavior, can not be usedto identify Lee, who acts constitute the crime of illegal business. Third, is to analyzethe specific meaning of the illegal operation of "serious", Lee et al. Behavior has notreached the degree of penalty sanctions.The fourth part is the research conclusions. Through the use of thecombination of theory and cases Lee private detective in the investigation should bebanned or given administrative punishment, does not constitute the crime of illegalbusiness.