Qualitative Study On Criminal Law Of "Double Fraud"

"Double fraud"(commonly known as "two-sided fraud")is a more complex type of fraud in judicial practice.In recent years,judicial practice is more common,involving more people,and the cases are more complex.Comparing many similar cases of"double fraud" cases,it is not difficult to find the same or similar cases but different sentences.This kind of situation exists not only between the higher and lower courts,but also among the three parties of prosecution,defense and trial.The reason for the different sentences in the same case is that there is no corresponding research on"double fraud" in criminal theory and practice,which leads to confusion in the qualitative analysis of "double fraud" in judicial practice.This is not only not conducive to judicial justice,but also against the principle of legally prescribed punishment for a crime and the principle of human rights protection.Therefore,it is necessary and in line with the requirements of judicial practice to conduct a qualitative study of "double fraud".The main body of this paper consists of four parts:The first part introduces three typical "double fraud" cases-car rental fraud cases.Summarize the similarities and differences of the three cases,and sort out the controversial focus of the qualitative analysis of car rental fraud.The second part defines "double fraud".To characterize the "double fraud"behavior,first of all,we must identify which characteristics of the case can be attributed to the "double fraud" category.This part includes the definition of the types of "double fraud" cases,the number of "double fraud" deceptive acts and the difference between"double fraud" and triangular fraud.Exclude those cases which appear to be "double fraud" rather than "double fraud".The third part makes a qualitative analysis of the first deception(or pre-deception)and the second deception(or post-deception)in "double fraud".This part deals with the determination of the crime and non-crime,this crime and that crime,that is,whether the two deceptive acts constitute a crime,and what crime should be convicted if they constitute a crime.Firstly,it summarizes the qualitative disputes in practice,compares the disputed viewpoints,and finds out the divergent origins of the disputed viewpoints.Then it analyses the contentious contents combined with the actors' behavior,and then qualitatively defines the first deception and the second deception in "double fraud".The fourth part makes a qualitative analysis of the number of "double fraud"crimes.This part is carried out on the basis of the third part,that is,after the analysis of the previous part,the relationship between the two deceptive acts before and after identification is further studied on the basis that both deceptive acts constitute crimes.Firstly,it summarizes the disputes about the number of "double fraud" crimes in practice,compares the disputed viewpoints,combines with the analysis of "double fraud" cases,and then identifies the number of "double fraud" crimes,which is also the relationship between the two fraudulent acts.This paper holds that the first and second fraudulent acts of "double fraud"constitute the crime of contract fraud.In addition,it gives a new interpretation of the type of "double fraud" cases,the number of crimes and the difference between "double fraud" and triangle fraud.