Lending Activities By Violence, Threatening To Force Others To Provide Qualitative

Legislation to restrict jurisdiction, reveal the explicit, the offense and a series ofdynamic behavior and the static text."Language itself is a kind of expression ofthought established in line with the system", this is the static text language itselfattribute; Behavior is of others will dominate force in the specific time and spaceenvironment, it is harmful to the society behavior connotation dynamic properties."Language itself is a kind of expression of thought established in line with thesystem", this is the static text language itself attribute; Lending activities by violence,threatening to force others to provide is the best example of this kind of violation ofcriminal law the behavior of the bottom line can he for two: violence, coercion andforce others to provide loans. Both cross, both behaviors of different and overtbehavior degree of each different, really have the judicial dilemma in conviction. Inline with the theory to provide refers to practice, practice to this kind of behaviordecision as far as possible "connection with different sentence" or "connection withdifferent punishment", the paper selected topic based on the judicial practice, tochoose the splitting problem therein.Compelling others to provide loan by violence or threat refers to a person compels financial institution staff to provide loans of legal forms in the ways that sieges, assaults, bundles others or objects causes any physical or spiritual duress. The characteristics of compelling others to provide loan by violence or threat mainly include following three respects: the offender is intentional in subjective respect; the offender committed such as threatening violence in objective respect; with respect to the object of the act, it infringes legal interests regulated by law. Currently, the nature of compelling others to provide loan by violence or threat is controversial. There are mainly four different theories, including robbery, extortion, transaction by force, and innocence respectively. These four theories involve the objective act, mens rea, non-criminalization system etc. Due to the nature of loans as a type of marketable trading of financial servicesand the connection with transaction by force, we should analyze relevant criminal theories, including the distinctions between robbery and extortion by threat, and transaction by force, and their corresponding scope.Judges should consider the combination of objective respect and the subjective respect when they deal with cases with respect to compelling others to provide loan by v iolence or threat, rather than reach a conclusion merely on the basis of an ambiguous concept. More specifically, making loans is not uncommon trading for financial institutions in the context of market economy. Due to the nature of marketable trading, trading that is contrary to the doctrine of voluntariness and impartiality initially should beconsidered carefully as to whether it should be classified as crime of transaction by force to regulate. Second, intention of unlawful occupation is not a deliberate concept, in terms of subjective respect of the act. Whoever, for the purpose of illegal possession,uses violence or coercion to force the others to provide credit in the name ofborrowing shall be convicted of the crime of robbery or the crime of extortion andsubject to criminal liability accordingly if the act meets the provisions in Article263or Article274of the Criminal Law.