An Analysis Of The Nature Of Fraudulent Contracts To Defraud The Company's Coal Mines

The paper analyzes,discusses and determines the nature of some puzzles in the case with Li's swindling crime case as the example in combination with juridical practice and related theories,and puts forward viewpoints and understandings of the author,expecting to provide reference for future handling of similar cases.Besides the Introduction,main body of the paper is divided into four parts with over 20,000 words in total.The first part makes introduction of basic case information,including introduction of case details,differences in opinions,and conclusion of dispute focuses.Firstly,the author introduces details of the case;secondly,different opinions are summarized according to problems of the case,while opinions and causes of different parties are concluded.Aiming at the case,four different opinions are proposed,including constitution of a crime of swindling,constitution of a crime of duty encroachment,non-constitution of crime,constitution of both the crime of swindling and the crime of duty encroachment.Thirdly,four dispute focuses are summarized according to different opinions in the paper: firstly,how to determine the nature of a behavior of changing others' enterprise industrial and commercial registration by fraudulent means;secondly,whether post factums of a victiminfluences establishment of a crime;thirdly,how to determine the nature of a behavior that a company shareholder sells off company properties arbitrarily and keeps them for his own;fourthly,how to determine the nature of behavior involving coexistence of swindling acts and embezzlement acts.The second part conducts jurisprudence analysis of above focus problems.Firstly,objective aspects of the crime of swindling are analyzed,mainly involving analysis of the objective behavior of “making up the fact,concealing the truth”,“willing disposal of properties” and standards for un-accomplishment of crime of swindling;secondly,effects of the victim's post factums on conviction are analyzed based on theories of justifiable causes and unauthorized disposal;thirdly,whether crime subjects of the duty encroachment crime includes private entrepreneurs and shareholders and whether immovable properties could become crime objects of the crime are analyzed;fourthly,how to make conviction and measurement of penalty for coexistence of swindling act and duty encroachment act is analyzed by crime quantity theory.The third part analyzes behaviors conducted by Li in the case using legal principles in combination with case details.Firstly,it is confirmed that Li's contract counterfeiting for coal mine swindling already constitutes the accomplishment of swindling crime;secondly,post factum of joint company operation by Li and Hui could not constitute the justifiable cause and brings no effect on constitution of the swindling crime;thirdly,during joint operation of the coal mine,Li and Hui sold offthe coal mine by taking advantages of their positions,satisfying constitutive components of the duty encroachment crime in form,but it is essentially a continuous act of swindling crime.Hence,Li's act constitutes the swindling crime.The fourth part puts forward enlightenments of the case.Through analysis of the case,three enlightenments are obtained,namely how to distinguish common civil fraudulent conducts and fraudulent crime conducts in juridical practice,acquaintance of a victim's post factums on crime establishment,and how to master the crime quantity issue in juridical practice.These enlightenments are of certain referential significance to juridical practice.