Research On The Judicial Identification Of "Routine Loan"

In recent years,there have been some illegal criminal activities in society that take the name of private borrowings,create false payment facts by signing false contracts,intentionally breach the contract and maliciously increase the loan amount,etc.Because such illegal and criminal activities are increasingly rampant,and criminal suspects often use violence,intimidation or false lawsuits to urge debts,the judicial community collectively refers to such crimes as "routine loan" crimes.Such crimes involve many "routines" and the involved persons are complicated,which makes the investigation and trial of the case difficult.In some areas,the crime of "routine loans" has gradually been intertwined with the evil forces,destroying the economic and social order,and causing great social harm.Although the country and various regions have successively issued relevant judicial interpretations,in judicial practice,there are still many problems in the application of Criminal Law in the "routine loan" cases.With regard to the different forms of crime in the implementation of the “routine loan”process,conviction and sentencing should be carried out according to the specific circumstances of the case in accordance with the Criminal Law and relevant judicial interpretations.First of all,it should be judged whether the perpetrator has “illegal possession” as a crime and non-crime.Under normal circumstances,in the name of private lending,the act of illegally occupying the legal property of others by means of signing false contracts,creating breaches of contract,etc.should be through the objective fraud committed by the actor,the misunderstanding of the victim,and the type of contract involved in "routine loans" Conduct an analysis to determine the crime of fraud or contract fraud.And only if the "routine loan" behavior meets the provisions of Article 225,Paragraph 4 of the Criminal Law,does it constitute an illegal business crime.It is a crime of false litigation to illegally possess the property of a victim by forging evidence and filing a lawsuit during the implementation of a “routine loan”.Secondly,if the perpetrator used coercion to force the victim to be psychologically forced during the process of signing the contract and collecting debts,it constituted the crime of extortion;if the degree of coercion had reached the level of suppressing the victim and met the requirements of "two scenes",it constituted the crime ofrobbery.Thirdly,during the debt collection process,the perpetrator has committed to restrict the personal freedom of others,and should be convicted and punished with the crime of illegal detention.If during the illegal detention,violent means were implemented that the victim could not resist,then the crime of kidnapping was found.Regarding the crime of “routine loan” behavior,the identification of the principal and slave should be based on the role of the defendant in participating in the “routine loan” crime and the division of labor among members in each link.With regard to the identification of accomplices,if there is an employment relationship between the "routine loans",the distinction should be made from the subjective will to constitute a joint crime.As for the relationship between those involved in "accounting",it is necessary not only to judge whether the two parties have conspired in advance,but also to analyze the objective factors such as the number of contacts.And,if the "routine loan" case meets the characteristics of the evil forces,it can be regarded as a crime involving the evil forces,but all the "routine loan" crimes cannot be regarded as crimes of the evil forces.