Li Sued A Bureau Administrative Punishment Decision Case Analysis

The status of intellectual property rights is rising, the violation of intellectual property rights and criminal behavior also showed an upward trend. This article takes the intellectual property dispute as the breakthrough point, selects the Li sued A industry and Commerce Bureau administrative penalty decision case. This article mainly involves the illegal business amount determination standard, one thing no longer the penalty principle and the criminal priority principle and so on. First, the amount of illegal business standards identified. The key lies in the determination of the standard of proof of administrative punishment, the general administrative penalty shall be applicable to the evidence standard of obvious advantages, and the administrative penalty for the application of summary procedure should be applicable to the standard of evidence. Li counterfeit trademark infringement shall is obviously preponderance of the evidence standard, administrative law enforcement organs only according to the statements of the parties identified the amount of illegal business practices and did not meet the standards needed to achieve the degree of proof of administrative punishment. The evidence of administrative penalty evidence can be transformed into criminal punishment shall be only limited to the physical evidence, documentary evidence, audio-visual materials and electronic data. Judicial organs alone may determine the amount of illegal business operation in accordance with the criminal judicial procedure. The court that accepts the administrative litigation can not directly refer to the fact that the criminal judgment is based on the fact that the administrative penalty decision is determined. Secondly, the relationship between the administrative penalty and the criminal penalty caused by the illegal act is not a category of the principle of non penalty. Application of "relationship between the administrative punishment and the concurrence of criminal punishment punishment system" is essentially the illegal behavior of dual illegality decision. In the entity to punish the principle, also apply to the administrative punishment and the criminal punishment is not a violation of the principle of no punishment. A trade and Industry Bureau of a fake registered trademark infringement can be administrative penalties, the administrative penalty decision does not violate the principle of no longer fined. Finally, caused by illegal administrative punishment and criminal punishment of competing. In the procedure should be according to the procedure of administrative investigation results to determine the order of application, an illegal act constitutes a crime, the principle of giving priority to the application of the criminal; does not constitute a crime, administrative punishment, administrative application priority principle. A trade and Industry Bureau in the knowing that the act constitutes a crime shall be transferred to the public security organs, the administrative penalty is still issued decisions and execution is completed, the procedure is illegal. Through the inspired by the analysis and study of the case:first of all, in the infringement of intellectual property rights enforcement process identified the amount of illegal business phenomenon, administrative law enforcement organs and judicial organs should develop consistent amount of illegal business standards; secondly, disconnect between administrative law enforcement and criminal justice, procuratorial organs should strengthen mutual supervision. Finally, the hope that through the legal analysis of the case of the legal analysis can eventually form a kind of "case -- Norm Theory" between the research model.