Qualitative Analysis Of Fraud Lawsuit

Qualitative litigation fraud trial either in theory or in practice are of great controversy, because there is no clear legal provision or judicial interpretation of the proceedings conducted fraud provisions. Some scholars believe that the legal proceedings against fraud without clearly defined, and therefore does not constitute a crime; while most scholars believe that the action constitutes a crime of fraud, but there are different opinions constituting the crime. In practice, the absence of clear rules around the qualitative and fraud litigation is not the same, in2004, Li Yong prejudice to testify case is one of them. Proceedings, litigation fraud against Li Yong’s how qualitatively there is a great controversy, but ultimately was only in2002according to the Supreme People’s Procuratorate of Heilongjiang High Court’s reply to Li Yong conviction. Although the case has been Greatly over the years, but scholars and other similar cases for the qualitative case Greatly controversy has failed to stop. With the development of society and economy, litigation fraud appear more frequently in people’s field of vision, such as the2005Beijing Li Lizeng fraud,2007, Guangzhou, Li Jing and other prejudice to testify, Liu Jun helped forge evidence case and2010Putuo District of Zhoushan City Le Jianguo fraud, the court were to fraud, obstruction of testimony crime, the crime of forgery and fraud and other evidence were different treatments. With the increase in cases of fraud litigation, litigation fraud danger to society is also growing, urgent need for justice for viewing situation similar cases, and improve the relevant legislation. The author thinks that standard uniform of such cases in order to make a fair judgment of fraud litigation, but ultimately fraud litigation should be a clear legal requirement.In this paper, a total of four parts:The first part is the introduction of the basic circumstances of the case.(A) cause of action. Summarized by streamlining language general situation of the case, to facilitate the understanding of the circumstances of the case.(B) case. Details and sort occurred during the case, so that the behavior of the perpetrator’s better judgment.(C) differences of opinion. Qualitative perpetrator of the case there are three different views, opinions and reasons were elaborated.(D) the focus of debate. On the basis of these differences of opinion over the focus of controversy summed up the case:Greatly through litigation conduct illegal possession of the property of others how to identify;The second part is the analysis of the relevant legal issues. This part is the focus of this paper is divided into two parts. The first part is the introduction of the basic characteristics of fraud litigation, fraud litigation through a basic introduction to understanding fraud lawsuit, after its analysis on the provision of basic knowledge. The second part is controversial views on litigation fraud analysis, fraud litigation analysis identified as innocent, identified as the crime of obstruction of evidence and identified as fraud analysis and elaborate their support reasons. First through litigation fraud behavioral characteristics come to define fraud lawsuit after lawsuit theoretically clear the concept of fraud were evaluated qualitatively different viewpoints and perspectives ultimately come author;The third part is the analysis and conclusions of the case. In the present case analysis section, according to the theory of the second part of the analysis, combined with the case, the case analysis shows different views of the focus of controversy; at the conclusion of the case, the first conviction of Li Yong, based on the above analysis, the results should Greatly characterized as fraud, followed by the sentencing of Li Yong, according to defraud sentencing range, Greatly shall be imprisonment or life imprisonment sentence within the range of more than a decade. Given Greatly are attempted, in accordance with the provisions of a lighter or mitigated punishment;The fourth part is the revelation of the case. Inspiration section is divided into two parts. The first part is to discuss the need to incorporate the criminal law fraud litigation because litigation fraud has serious harm and now more and more cases of fraud litigation, litigation fraud will only be included in order to adjust the scope of the criminal law to effectively combat and curb the behavior of the behavior occurs; second part is a reference by reference and abroad, I make two points:fraud litigation, the introduction of relevant judicial interpretation will interpret it as one of the acts or defraud the time is ripe, the fraud lawsuit separate into sin.