Criminal Law Analysis For The Act Of Occupational Fraud

Since the reform and opening up,the rapid development of the market economy has made people's living standards increasingly higher,and has also spawned many new industries to make the entire society more colorful.The economic development determines that people will have more and more transactions in their lives.Where there are transactions,there will be contradictions and conflicts arising from transactions.Therefore,the process of economic development is inseparable from the progress of the rule of law and it is also followed up and escorted.The order of the market needs the regulation of the law,and the conduct of the subjects in the market requires the guidance of the law.However,in some areas,the diversification of the market environment has determined that legislative work is often difficult to achieve in one step.Some laws may deviate from the original intention of legislators when they are applied,and some laws may appear to be too advanced and some are not grounded.".In short,in the face of the complexity of the social environment and the complexity of human nature,laws that are originally well-endorsed may come to unexpected results when they are implemented.The punitive compensation measures prescribed by the “Consumer Protection Law” for producers and business operators are examples.This is a heavy blow to those who violated laws and regulations in the consumer sector.I did not expect to actually create a practitioner.The"emerging industry": occupational fraud.Even more unexpectedly,some professional scammers even went to jail for breaking the criminal law.This article attempts to discuss the phenomenon.The entry point comes from a complaint case that the author contacted during the internship of the Chongqing Higher People's Court.The case was well-known in the media industry.Huang Yong,a professional counterfeiter,was prosecuted by the prosecution agency on suspicion of conducting extortion against more than300 television stations and advertising business units.The case was finally found guilty.The typical meaning of the case is that,compared to other cases in which a professional counterfeiter violates the criminal law,the defendant's behavior in the case is representative,and it is even more difficult to characterize the criminal civil cross-section.In other words,this behavior is not only a mode of operation that is highly commonly used by professional anti-counterfeiters,but also has multiple appearances that are mixed in appearance: it is a consensus reached in the civil sector through negotiation and compromise,and it also bears Some criminal areas have infringed on the distinctive features of property rights crimes.In short,this is a phenomenon that people are plagued by in the current judicial practice.The results of decisions made by local courts at all levels are also very different from the propositions issued.The attempt to explore this article is precisely to find a more precise answer to this question within the current legal framework in this rapidly developing economy.The full text is a total of 30,000 words divided into four partsThe first part is the introduction part.First of all,it briefly introduces the situation and background of the legislation of the "Consumer Protection Law" and the revision of the two aspects,and explains the research significance and methods of this article.In addition,this section also introduces the development and current situation of a very special industry for professional anti-counterfeiters.It can be seen from this that when a citizen's rights protection evolves into a spontaneous industry,corresponding social problems will inevitably emerge.The second part mainly deals with three cases in which professionals are being prosecuted for extortion.The case of Huang Yong that will be discussed in this paper is also included.Of the three cases,only the Huang Yong case was found guilty by the court,while the defendants in the other two cases were acquitted.In fact,the defendants in the three cases were highly similar in their behavioral patterns,and the final result of“different judgments in the same case”was also indeed debatable.Through the comparison of the three cases,this section attempts to summarize the similarities and subtle differences between them,and put forward questions for discussion later.The third part first consults the viewpoints of foreign doctrines and practices on the issues discussed in this article,so as to supplement the academic analysis that has not been carefully carried out in the Judgments in the previous part.At the same time,this section also joins two other real cases that resemble professional fraud.The specific behavior of defendants revealed in these two cases is undoubtedly in sharp contrast with the three cases in the previous section.Therefore,this section further summarizes the logic of judging such cases.According to this idea,this article analyzes the rights of professional anti-counterfeiters,and in turn discriminates whether the professional anti-counterfeiter has the identity of the consumer,and whether the professional anti-counterfeiter knows that the act of buying fake gifts can be evaluated as“ cheated ”.Finally,it is concluded that professional anti-counterfeiters do fall under the protection of the Consumer Protection Law and other laws.The fourth part combines the criminal law theory with the specific performance of the actors in Huang Yong's case to discuss whether Huang Yong's alleged extortion is true.Inaddition to the analysis based on individual cases alone,this article also presents the market environment in which the cases were rooted in the final part to confirm that Huang Yong's behavior should be more positively evaluated at the legal level.After reaching a final conclusion on the case,the scope of this article will also be expanded to the legislative and judicial level,and legislative and judicial proposals will be made on the basis of the social issues reflected in the case.