On The Judicial Determination Of The Crime Of Private Dividing State-owned Assets

The crime of unauthorized partition of state-owned assets privately is a newly established crime in criminal law of 1997,which is separated from the crime of corruption.Since the two have similarities in the crime object,objective and subjective aspects,there are different opinions on the difference between the two crimes in the theoretical circle,which makes it difficult to accurately define the two crimes.What is followed is the difficulty of the practical departments to determine the specific facts of the case in the handling process.In judicial practice,some criminals make unauthorized partition of state-owned assets subjectively in line with the idea of collective internal equity,while it shows the characteristics of common corruption in the way of behavior,such as the behavior of reporting false statements to the upper level and appropriating funds.As for this kind of case,it is often identified as corruption behavior when the circumstances of suspected corruption crime appear.Besides,it reflects the tendency of objective imputation,which is contrary to the principle of subjective and objective conformity in our criminal law.In turn,some serious acts of corruption in the trial stage are eventually turned into misdemeanor due to the inaccurate distinction between the two crimes,which will inevitably damage the credibility of the judiciary.In this paper,it will analyze a typical case to compare the two crimes,so as to have a good distinction of them.In the paper,it is divided into three parts in addition to the introduction part.In the first part,it introduces the basic case and the controversy focus of Liang and Zuo's corruption cases.In this case,Liang and Zuo distributed the profits of the canteen,shop and quick printing room of the logistics department of public school to themselves and the employees of the logistics department in the name of "bonus" and "performance",which infringed the property interests of the school.However,the court and the procuratorate have different opinions on whether Liang and Zuo constitute the crime of corruption.Since the procuratorate prosecutes the crime of corruption,the first trial of the court decides the crime of unauthorized partition of state-owned assets privately,and the second trial maintains the first trial.Therefore,it forms the focus of the dispute in this case,that is,whether Liang and Zuo constitute the crime of corruption or the crime of unauthorized partition of state-owned assets privately.In the second part,it starts with the four elements of the crime of corruption and the crime of unauthorized partition of state-owned assets privately,which analyzes the viewpoint that the perpetrator constitutes the crime of corruption and the crime of unauthorized partition of state-owned assets privately.Finally,it is believed that the crime of unauthorized partition of state-owned assets privately can adapt to the criminal responsibility and punishment of Liang and Zuo.In the third part,it is the thinking and suggestions.Based on the analysis in the second part,it extracts the differences between the crime of unauthorized partition of state-owned assets privately and the crime of corruption,which also explores the special considerations in the determination of the crime of unauthorized partition of state-owned assets privately,such as the motive of crime,the object of crime and the scope of private partition.Finally,it puts forward suggestions in view of the situation that the provisions of state-owned assets are not perfect.