The Criminal Analysis Of The Behavior Of Diddling The Company Property For Taking Interests

In the theory of the criminal law, there are obvious differences in object, subject, objective aspect and subjective aspect between the bribery crime of non- national public servant, crime of official embezzlement and crime of fraud from the view of the constitution of crime. It is not difficult to distinguish crime from noncrime or this crime from that crime. However, their common places and similarities caused puzzle for judicial people to distinguish this crime from that crime. There are lots of studies on bribery crime in theory of the criminal law, but the studies on the bribery crime of non- national public servant are mostly mixed in studies of commercial bribery crime whereas they are not the same. With the development of society, some new problems occurred in judicial practice which results in many legal loopholes in bribery crime of non-national public servant. Therefore the bribery crime of non-national public servant is not perfect yet. For instance, how to distinguish it from the crime of official embezzlement and whether it is Implicated Offense when “trying to obtain profit for others” in the bribery crime of non- national public servant becomes other crimes at the same time and how to convict and punish. There are many differences both in theory and in practice. This paper is to offer certain guidance to similar cases through a deep analysis on Lee's crime of official embezzlementThe thesis is formed by four parts, a total of nineteen thousand words:Part one is the basic facts of the case including cause of action, facts of the case, different opinions and focus of dispute.Part two makes jurisprudential analysis on it. In this part, the differences between the bribery crime of non- national public servant, crime of official embezzlement and crime of fraud are fully studied as well as the definition, character and principal of punishment of the Implicated Offense.Part four is the analysis and conclusion. According to the jurisprudential analysis in Part two, combined with the facts of the case, it analyzed Lee's act that in order to make personal profits and illegal interests for others which caused great loss tocompany's property and then comes to the conclusion. That is, Lee's act violated both the bribery crime of non- national public servant and the crime of official embezzlement. His act belongs to the Implicated Offense of the bribery crime of nonnational public servant which should get combined punishment for the two offenses.Part four is the enlightenment of the research. The paper finds out some defects in current law and judicial interpretation through the jurisprudential analysis of Lee's crime of official embezzlement so here offered two pieces of suggestion to better guide similar cases in practice.