Evaluation Of Mr.zhou Illegal Absorbing Public Deposits Case

With the growing prosperity of the socialist market economy activity, stakeholder type ongoing economic crimes were high incidence in our country. During the weekend some illegal absorbing public deposits in a city has certain representativeness of such cases. The case after the city’s two levels of the people’s court of the two, find the conviction and sentencing are involved at this stage the difficult problem of such cases, namely the crime of illegal absorb public deposits and normal lending and raise the differences and relations between crime of fraud. As the name implies, the folk lending is normal folk economic intercourse activities; Illegal absorbing public deposits, fund-raising fraud, all belong to the crime of criminal law has clear stipulation in our country. According to different object of the them, the illegal absorbing public deposits is destroy financial management order crime,fund-raising fraud is financial fraud crime. Legal punishment of criminal law on the two charges set. In "criminal law amendment(9)" before carrying out, committing the crime of fraud of the raise of the maximum punishment prescribed is the death penalty, in the "criminal law amendment(9)" after carrying out, committing the crime of fraud of the raise of the maximum punishment prescribed is life imprisonment; And committed crime of illegal absorb public deposits both before the implementation of the criminal law amendment(9) or after implementation, the highest legal punishment for ten years in prison.Because the two charges in behavior form has many similarities, anddifference in the penalty amount on the set of huge, so distinguish between two crimes can make the defendant guilty of punishment, can do that when the crime was punished. Difference between the two charges of the subject of the key problem lies in the difference between whether has the purpose of illegal possession. If the offender in raising funds illegally subjectively has the purpose of illegal possession, the actor was illegal fund-raising behavior would be in the crime constitution of crime of fraud of the fund-raising; On the other hand, if the offender was only financing behavior, but not the funds for some purpose, theirs is illegal even if the offender financing when the act constitutes a crime, it only it can conform to the statutory sentencing low of criminal element of the crime of illegal absorb public deposits, and do not meet the requirements of the fund-raising fraud crime constitution.