Research On The Difficult Issues In The Judicial Determination Of Corruption Crimes

The corruption of government power is the biggest excrescence which leads to the Tacitus Trap of state power.To defeat the corruption is people's desire and the key to the long-term stability of a country.It's a huge project and a long way to go to eradicate corruption.The crime of corruption is a crime of a corrupt nature.The consequences of the crime directly violate the integrity and unpurchasability of public property and the duties of state officials.It seriously erodes the fairness and justice of society and even the security of government and national defense.For a long time,China has always emphasized and focused on the severe crackdown on corruption-related crimes and the high-pressure situation of corruption.The current situation of corruption crimes is still severe and complicated,which has continued to promote the exploration and research on the legislation,justice and theory of corruption crimes in academic circles.In recent years,after continuous development and hard research,China's research on the crime of corruption has made remarkable progress and fruitful results.Nevertheless,with the profound changes in the socio-economic environment and the continuous reform of the state-owned enterprise system,corruption has encountered many new situations and problems in the process of judicial determination.It is difficult to cover all aspects of practice in laws and related judicial interpretations.Existing provisions need to be further explained to gradually improve them so as to meet the needs of social development.This article,as a graduate thesis of a master's degree,chooses to introduce some cases to introduce some controversial issues,such as the 2010 "two highs","Opinions on the specific application of the law on the handling of professional crime cases in state-funded enterprises,is it inappropriate?The scope of identification of "national staff" has been expanded;questions such as whether false reporting of travel expenses,training expenses,and other illegal use of unit funds have made are defined.The article is divided into three chapters:The first chapter expounds the analysis of the concepts of "appointment","engagement in public service","organizations with responsibility for management and supervision of state-owned assets",and scientific identification of"engagement in public service".The desirability and deficiencies of opinions lead to a reasonable interpretation of the disputed clause.The second chapter explains the legislative intent of this concept by reviewing the changes of the concept of "national staff" and thinking about the purpose of legislation.The third chapter analyzes the concept of"utilization" and "facility of work" and makes a typed explanation.In the case,the actor illegally appropriated the company's property through falsely reporting travel expenses.Through the discussions in these three chapters,the expression of Article 6,paragraph 2 of the 2010 "Two Highs" Opinions was interpreted as:" The directors,supervisors and senior management of state-funded enterprises approved or studied and decided by the party committee at this level or above.Personnel who,on behalf of party committees at or above the level,are engaged in the organization,leadership,supervision,operation,and management of state-owned,share-holding companies and their branches within the scope of authority to manage and supervise state-owned assets shall be identified as national staff;" It is considered that the state-funded joint-stock bank manager's falsely reported travel expenses,training expenses,and other expenses are the use of job convenience in the course of his behavior,which is a means-based and direct use of relatively independent and indirect control-type job convenience and an objective act of corruption.