Study On The Determination Of The Crime Of Forcing Trading

The state has always encouraged the freedom of trading in the market economy and gave full play to the autonomy and openness of market transactions.With the progress of the times,market trading behaviors are becoming more and more abundant,and a series of trading behaviors are causing more and more problems.Under market supervision,laws and regulations are still ignored by the actors,and the law is illegal.It was not until 1997 that the forced trading act was separated from the previous speculation,called the forced trading crime,which was included in the chapter of the social market economic order.Prior to the 1997 Criminal Law,the objective behavior of the crime of forced trade stipulated two kinds: one is the strong purchase and sale of goods;the other is the forced behavior of the person providing services or forcing the perpetrator to accept the service.Although the compulsory trading behavior is effectively contained under the supervision of the law,the limitations of the law and the nature of the lag determine that the law cannot cover all the transactions that occur in reality.In 1997,the provisions of the Criminal Law on the crime of forced trading also gradually revealed a simple and vague side.First,the lag of the law will make the law ineffective,and the market transaction order will be destroyed for a long time.Second,the legal penalty for forced trading is too high,not only indulging the crime,but also appearing conviction and punishment in specific cases.Therefore,on the basis of the 1997 Criminal Law,the 2011 Criminal Law Amendment(VIII)added three objective behaviors.Compared with the 1997 Criminal Law,this revision not only increased the behavioral pattern of forced transactions,but also improved the penalty.Strike strength.However,due to the fact that the objective behaviors stipulated in the crime of forced trade cannot cover the increasingly-curricular transaction-type crimes,and the competing nature of the forced transaction crimes with other types of crimes,the specific identification and application of the crime of forced transactions is controversial in judicial practice.Under the operation of the market mechanism,the problem of the determination of the crime of forced trading has not been solved well in theory or in practice.This article takes the case of illegally collecting service fees by Li et al.In the predicament,in response to the current problems in China,the corresponding legislative improvement proposals are proposed.The second part elaborates the juris prudential analysis of the dispute focus in this case.This part discusses in detail the constituent elements of the crime of forced transaction.As well as the difference between the crime of forced trading and the crime of illegal operation and the crime of provoking trouble in subjective and objective aspects.The third part is the legal thinking caused by the case.In combination with the provisions of the current criminal law in China on the crime of forced trading,it puts forward suggestions on perfection in legislation.