On The Threat Of Extortion

The practice of the crime of extortion is a multi-act crime that consisted of the action of threatening and the action of asking for money.The actor holds the aim of illegal occupancy and uses illegal means to threaten;the actor fits the actus reus of the crime of extortion,thus he can be unquestionably convinced guilty in the name of the extortion crime.However,when it comes into judicial practice,the cases of extortion are various.The actor frequently uses a legal way to threaten and to ask for money,instead of using an illegal one.The actor uses a legal means to threaten,if the means of threatening alone is allowed by law,under such circumstance,the questions of will this legal action leads to a psychological coercive effect on the opposite party,will this be defined as extortion,and should the actor be convinced the crime of extortion,have not had a clear answer.The understanding of the threat means of extortion is controversial in theory and practice.There are three main theories in this field: firstly,information contends in the‘deleterious object' that is used to make a threat does not have to be illegal;secondly,legal and legitimate means cannot become threats to other people;thirdly,law suit and reporting cases to the police cannot become threats,but the threatening of informing media can be viewed as a means of threating.In judicial practice,this has caused the problem of ‘same case,two sentences' and has resulted in the phenomenon of misjudgement regarding sentencing.Based on these circumstances,the point of analysing current studies and common views on the means of extortion,exploring existing problems,discussing whether a legal means can become a way of threatening in the crime of extortion,is to discuss whether a legal means can pose psychological coercive effect to the opposite party,and whether a legal means can become the secondary object of the crime of extortion.More specifically,due to the fact that the crime of extortion has many objects,in order to convict this crime,the means of threatening must be found as infringing upon other people's personal rights or other rights.Through analysis,normally,using a legal means to threaten will neither infringer opposite party's personal rights,nor cause substantial damage to the opposite party,nor infringe any social relation.In addition,the key point of convicting the crime ofextortion is that the threatening means will result in opposite party's giving out of properties due to psychological coercion,and at this time opposite party's agreement is defective,and obey the principle of free intent in disposing properties.After analysis,generally,using a legal means to threaten allows the opposite party to choose other ways to protest own interests.However,based on the consideration of personal intreats,opposite party choose to give money to actor instead of using other methods,therefore the opposite party is not forced to make a payment,so could not be defined as receiving psychological coercive effect.Since legal means should generally not be regarded as a means of threatening to the crime of extortion,that is,the means of threatening of the crime of extortion should be restricted to illegal means.Therefore,a further discussion is needed regarding in practice,facing the actor's various means,which are legal,and which are illegal,and how to make right judgements.Confronting problems above,through discussing common types of case in practice,asking for high compensation,requesting high break-up fees,youth compensation and governmental compensations will be studied separately.