Study On The Judicial Determination Of "Professional Anti-counterfeiting" Behavior

"Professional Counterfeit" is a kind of social phenomenon which appears with the development of the Law of Elimination in China." Professional Counterfeit " involves morality and law,which is controversial in both theory and judicial practice.At present,the number of cases of "professional anti-counterfeiting" in judicial practice is increasing,at the same time,the identification of "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior has been puzzling judicial practice,and the phenomenon of different judgments in the same case also occurs from time to time.Aiming at this phenomenon,although both academic and practical circles have already studied,the related research is more aimed at some aspect of "professional anti-false" behavior —— especially the knowledge-false-false-buy-false behavior,and less on the overall legal analysis of "professional anti-false" behavior.Therefore,it is of great significance to deal with the phenomenon of "professional anti-counterfeiting" in judicial practice by making a comprehensive analysis of "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior combined with specific cases and discussing the judicial determination of "professional anti-counterfeiting behavior ".This paper uses the method of case analysis to study the behavior of "professional anti-counterfeiting" from the perspective of typical cases.First of all,the first part of the article specifically introduces three typical cases of "professional fight against fraud ",which leads to the main controversial focus of this kind of case: whether " professional fight against fraud " has consumer subject qualification,what is the composition of " professional fight against fraud " behavior,whether " professional fight against fraud " behavior has legitimacy.Secondly,the second to fourth parts are the specific analysis of the three dispute focus of this kind of case.Secondly,the second to fourth parts are the specific analysis of the three dispute focus of this kind of case.The second part analyzes whether "professional counterfeiters" belong to consumers.Since "professional fraud" is not a legal concept,this part mainly starts from the controversy of the definition of consumer scope in academic circles,combines the characteristics of "professional counterfeiters ",analyzes whether " professional counterfeiters " belong to the scope of consumers protected by the elimination law,and finally draws a negative conclusion.The third part mainly analyzes the behavior composition of "professional anti-counterfeiting ",which respectively analyzes the subjective intention of " professional anti-counterfeiting person ",the objective performance of "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior and the possible administrative,civil and criminal legal consequences of "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior.The fourth part analyzes whether the "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior has legitimacy and legitimacy.At present,the attitude of academic circles to "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior is divided into positive and negative attitudes.Based on the analysis of relevant theories and characteristics of "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior,the author thinks that the "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior for profit-making purposes has no legitimacy,and discusses whether the "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior is applicable to the relevant legal provisions.Finally,the fifth part of the article analyzes and summarizes the judicial practice of "professional anti-counterfeiting" behavior.This part discusses the current situation of judicial practice in the identification of "professional anti-counterfeiting ",analyzes the problems existing in the judicial practice in the identification of " professional anti-counterfeiting " behavior,and puts forward some suggestions on the judicial practice of " professional anti-counterfeiting " behavior identification combined with the analysis of this paper,and thinks that the " professional anti-counterfeiting " behavior in the case can be specifically identified according to the different types of cases.