Study On The Validity Of Contract In Contract Fraud Cases

Whereas the number of criminal cases of contract swindle increases, civil legal relationship and criminal legal relationship are entangled in swindle cases, and disputes exist in theories and juridical practices from the point of confirmation of the validity state of civil contracts, civil liability and procedural application, this paper studies the ought-to-be legal status and other problems related to the intersection of civil law and criminal law existing in swindle cases through the theory of distinguishment of civil law and criminal law with the expectation to facilitate juridical practices.In addition to the introduction, this paper has been divided into four parts. The author discusses legal loopholes and judgment disputes of civil contract validity existing in swindle cases and attempts to theoretically explore the applicable specification in the first part. Existing civil law system does not stipulate positive governing for the contract validity of swindle cases, and such cases are neither “extralegal spaces” not to be adjusted by law nor the legislator's “meaningful silence”, thus, legal loopholes hereof exist and the missing of stipulations results in the confusion of juridical practices. The confirmation for civil contract validity of swindle cases is provided with two results of judgment and more than ten reasons for judgment. References show that the core of relevant disputes is lacking in in-depth knowledge of theories of distinguishment of public law and private law in the domestic theoretical cycle, and disputes about the judgment of contract validity are thus generated. Absolutenullity, absolute validity, revocability and other viewpoints are presented in the judge process of contract validity mainly because such cases are involved in public law.Second, the author focuses on criticizing existing comments on contract validity of swindle cases. First, theories of distinguishment of civil law and criminal law are stated, which lays a theoretical basis for proving validity and status of contract to be invalid. Then, a judgment is drawn that the contract validity of this case does not belong to three situations of covering illegal purposes in legal forms and the comment on invalidity of contract is criticized in the perspective that contracts of this case cause no damages to national benefit or public benefit and will cause damages to the guarantee system in the event that the validity of contract is defined as invalid, and in the perspective of semantic interpretation. Finally, the author expounds the contrast of this case does not conform to valid constitutive requirements of contract from the point of intention mispresentation and criticizes the comment on absolute validity of contract obtained from practices.Third, the author discusses theoretical effects upon the validity of contract, which lays the foundation for comments on the validity of contract. This case is involved in civil law and criminal law, substantial factors can be obtained from two complicated legal relationships only through theoretical reasons for the judgment of contract validity. On one hand, the author draws a conclusion that the judgment of contract validity equals to the conflict between autonomy of will and government regulation through delivering theoretical basis and substantial factors of contract validity. On the other hand, the quality of intention presentation of the party involved, legal evaluation of autonomy of will and other factors should be taken into account in the judge process of contract validity.Last but not the least, the ought-to-be state of civil contract validity of swindle cases and the effect of private law are defined. Except for the understanding of theoretical basis for contract validity, the ought-to-be state of contract validity should be accurately judged through discriminating a similar concepts civil swindle and criminal swindle. Criminal fraud is not necessarily the civil fraud impact, even if the influential it is only because of the effect of contract fraud criminal substantive factors(meaning, subject, subject) caused certain constraints arising. And involving the contract fraud in criminal fraud act to deceive only on the behavior of the contract the parties mean said untrue caused a certain influence. Therefore, the final will be civil contract in the case of effectiveness is defined as the revocation of the contract.Finally, the validity of civil contract of such cases is defined as revocable. The effect of private law of contractual behaviors in civil law is generated from theconfirmation of contract validity.Therefore, the legal effect of contract of such cases in civil law is determined by the swindler's authority relief.