| In recent years, the number of law cases about private lending is increasing. These cases are related to illegal absorbing deposit of the public, which involves a wide range of people and large amounts of money. How this series of cases should be dealt with judicial practice has become very difficult and urgent problem. After the debtor is accused of the crime of illegal absorbing deposit of the public, the effectiveness of the contract which is signed with the creditor becomes doubtful.Nowadays, the views of the contract are invalid or effective are both existed. From the perspective of the protection of creditors, the focus explores the loan contract and the related guarantee contract involves the effect. By discussing the status of the trial and academic point of view, the text try to distinguish between the different connotations processing mode, and according to the Supreme Court case, to think about what kind of judgment is more reasonable.There are big differences between the evaluation of criminal conduct and contract action. Criminal offenses and civil behavior is to be adjusted separately from the criminal and civil law which are two different legal systems. Determining the nature of the provisions is also an important question. What’ more, if we say the loan contract to be invalid hastily, it will not conducive to the protection of interests of the parties and transaction safety. Therefore, suspected or private loans constituted the crime of illegal absorbing deposit of the public, the contract a party may be held criminally responsible, and does not of course affect the effectiveness of private lending and corresponding guarantee contract.On this basis, the paper is also talk about the trial mode of illegal absorbing deposit of the public involved in the effectiveness of the contract. First trial of criminal cases before trial in civil cases blindly will lead to many troubles. According to the types of cases, we should use different ways. |
PDF Full Text Request