Research On The Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases Of Natural Person Loan-related Fraud

There are objective facts involving both civil legal relations and criminal legal relations in the same case,and the two types of objective facts are related to each other,or only the one objective fact exist,but it is still impossible to determine which type of legal relationship it is.The cases are collectively referred to as Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases.According to the content of the cross,the Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases can be divided into Substantive Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases and Procedural Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases.With the increasing complexity of social relations,the definition of substantive legal relations and the choice of judicial procedures in the Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases are crucial.Most scholars have already researched on Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases and put forward their own opinions on the dilemma of judicial practice.However,there are not many studies on the cases of Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases of Natural Person Loan-related Fraud.In the basic of searching the judgment documents,this thesis focuses on the definition of the substantive legal relationship and the choice of judicial proceedings in the case of Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases of Natural Person Loan-related Fraud,and compares the civil law and criminal law in micro and macro,and then make my own view.The first chapter introduces the concept of “criminal-civil intersection” and the judicial principle of the case of Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases of Natural Person Loan-related Fraud.In the definition of the concept of “criminal-civil intersection”,the objective facts and legal facts should be strictly distinguished.The same case may only involve an objective fact,and it will only be evaluated by one departmental law,or it may involve multiple objective facts,and they will be evaluated simultaneously by multiple departmental laws.Therefore,the intersection of criminal and civil is inevitable.Judicial practice is mostly interfered by the concept of “pre-criminal punishment conception” when dealing with Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases,so they always adopt to the solution of “Criminal First Civil Second”,push the criminal law to the forefront of evaluation behavior.Besides,the basis for the use of this solution by the judicial authorities is not uniform,reflecting that the cognition of Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases has not been unified.The second chapter is the main part of this thesis.It focuses on the issues of the legal relationship in the Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases of Natural Person Loanrelated Fraud.If the actor's fraud causes the financial institution such as a bank to sign a loan contract with him,thereby damaging the interests of the bank,it should be considered as a revocable contract.In the trial of such cases,whether it is “the Parallel Between the Criminal and the Civil” or “the Criminal First Civil Second”,the criminal guilty judgement does not deny the validity of the civil contract naturally.But the contract will lose its legal effect if it violates the mandatory legal provisions.When the Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases of Natural Person Loan-related Fraud are guaranteed by third parties,the guarantee contract will lose its legal effect only there is no effective contractual element or the main debt contract is invalid.However,if the creditor is not at fault,even if the guarantee contract is invalid,according to the establishment value of the guarantee system,the guarantor should still bear corresponding civil liability for the abstract credit of the guarantor's future performance of the debt.The crime of loan fraud must be accompanied by objective deception and the purpose of illegal possession.In the general sense,the purpose of illegal possession only refers to “exclusive”,that is,the exclusion of property possession by others,but the “illegal possession purpose” in the crime of loan fraud should be appropriately expanded and explained based on “excluding meaning”.The use of loans to cause property damage or to create risks that may lead to property damage in the future is one of the considerations for determining the crime of loan fraud,thereby strictly distinguishing the boundary between loan fraud and civil fraud,other related offences.For the actor to use fraudulent means to obtain a loan and then have the purpose of illegal possession,if it meets the other constitutive elements of the crime of loan fraud,it can still be regarded as a crime of loan fraud according to the specific circumstances.In the case where the perpetrator used fraudulent means to defraud the guarantor's trust,thereby providing him with a guarantee,it is uncertain for the perpetrator to ultimate victim.The perpetrator may subjectively recognize that the ultimate victim is the guarantor or the creditor,or it is also possible that the perpetrator is subjectively generalized,and no matter who is the ultimate victim,it does not violate the subjective will of the perpetrator.Therefore,for such cases,we should analyze in detail,it is unreasonable to adopt the backstepping method to judge the crime type depend on the ultimate victim.The third chapter is also the main part of this thesis.It mainly focuses on the issues of the procedure issues in the Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases of Natural Person Loanrelated Fraud.Under the principle of “equal emphasis on public and private rights” and “Give priority to fair while considering efficiency”,the legal relationships in the criminal-civil intersection case,can be divided into “the horizontally co-located case” and “the vertically overlapping case”.The former generally adopts “the Parallel Between the Criminal and the Civil”,the latter generally adopts the trial rules of “the Criminal First Civil Second”.It is necessary to clarify “pre-criminal punishment conception” and “the Criminal First Civil Second” rule,and limit the scope of " the Criminal First Civil Second”.The ongoing civil trials are handled differently according to different rules,mainly including “terminating trials,dismissing prosecutions”,“suspending trials” and “continuing trials”.As to the civil trial to choose “continue trials”,public security organs can still exercise their right to file investigations on their own because criminal proceedings' irreplaceability and civil judgments have no predetermined effect on criminal judgments.The actual defrauded by the perpetrator is the fraud amount,which should be limited to the capital and not include interest.In the case of criminal liability and civil liability coexist in the economic cases,the principle of maximizing efficiency should be adhered to.Civil compensation should take precedence over the enforcement of additional penalties in the criminal penalty.In the disposal of the property involved,the ownership and nature of the property shall be clarified.Except for the case where the bona fide third party obtains the ownership of the property,others belong to the legal property of the victim shall be priority return.Property that is converted from the crime should be recovered as booty.The fourth chapter is mainly to rethink the relationship between the criminal law and the civil law.After the overall study of the Criminal-Civil Intersection Cases of Natural Person Loan-related Fraud,for the relationship of the criminal law and the civil law have a further macroscopic understanding.For the criminal-civil intersection cases,the criminal law should be as tolerant as possible.If the cases involving criminals who can be criminalized,the trial rules of “the Criminal First Civil Second” can be applied.If there are not clear whether they are suspected of criminal offences or not,the public security should not file their own investigations on the grounds of “the Criminal First Civil Second”.