On The Demarcation Of Contract Swindling And Contract Fraud Behavior

There are many similarities and differences between the crime of contract swindling and civil contract fraud behavior.The study on the boundary between criminal and civil is helpful to the theoretical research and judicial practice of the crime of contract swindling.However,due to the fact that the research on this issue involves two different department laws at the same time,the theoretical discussion is not sufficient,and at the same time,the legal and judicial interpretation of the crime of contract swindling is not clear,which leads to many problems in the application of the crime of contract swindling in practice,making the identification of the specific crime of contract swindling in a relatively chaotic state.Through deconstructing the constitutive elements of crime of contract swindling and analyzing the constitutive elements of civil contract fraud behavior,this paper makes a comparative analysis of the two by using comparative analysis method,finds out the similarities and differences between the two from different perspectives of criminal law and civil law,and then conducts a comprehensive research on the boundary between criminal law and civil law of crime of contract swindling and contract fraud behavior through empirical analysis,so as to promote the research on the intersection between criminal law and civil law.The first chapter,by analyzing typical cases,the contract fraud and contract fraud in the judicial practice of difficulties,this difficulty is concentrated in the case of the referee to reflect on the results,the appear this kind of differences in the judgement,because the judge in the case without the correct cognizance of contract fraud and contract fraud,this is what the results of two typical cases to judge the dispute,The contract fraud behavior,as a crime prescribed by criminal law,has strict constitutive requirements.The objective and subjective aspects of the crime have strict requirements.Both subjective and objective aspects have their own legal hardware requirements.Then,this article analyzes the constituent elements of contract fraud behavior in the field of civil law,and finds out the differences between the two through comparison.Contract fraud behavior and crime of contract swindling have different requirements in subjective "illegal possession purpose" and different manifestations in objective fraud.Finally,by summarizing the differences in basic concepts between the two,it is found that the key to distinguish contract fraud behavior from crime of contract swindling lies in whether the subjective purpose has "illegal possession purpose",and objectively there are different contents in fraud.The second chapter focuses on analyzing the similarities and differences between crime of contract swindling and contract fraud behavior in four aspects——objective aspect,subjective aspect,applicable law and infringement of rights and interests.Objectively,both of them have deceptive acts of fabricating facts and concealing the truth,which have also caused the wrong understanding of the opposite party.However,there are differences in the content and form of fraud,and the cognitive errors pursued by the two are also opposite.The subjective aspect is that there is a great difference between the two in whether they have the "illegal possession purpose".For the crime of contract swindling,it shows obvious possession purpose of other people’s property and wants to obtain other people’s property through illegal means.However,contract fraud behavior does not have such purpose.It only wants to improve the success rate of contract signing through fraud in order to obtain certain illegal benefits through contract performance.The third chapter mainly analyzes the difficulties existing in the judicial practice of the cross-disciplinary cases of crime of contract swindling and contract fraud behavior and the specific solutions to these difficulties."Illegal possession purpose" is the main standard to distinguish crime of contract swindling and contract fraud behavior.Correct identification of it plays an important role in the definition of the two acts.Identifying "illegal possession purpose" requires a comprehensive investigation from the aspects of objective contract performance behavior,performance ability,the actor’s post-treatment of property and the time when the subjective purpose came into being,and a reasonable use of judicial presumption to judge these objective factors can reduce the difficulty of identifying "illegal possession purpose".Of course,having the "illegal possession purpose" does not necessarily mean that the crime of contract swindling must be established.We also need to analyze the specific circumstances of the case.For the procedural and substantive issues in the specific cases where the crime of contract swindling and contract fraud behavior cross between criminal and civil,we need to pay attention to the applicable sequence of criminal and civil liabilities of the two acts.