Research On The Judicial Identification Of The Crime Of "routine Loan"

Along with the rapid development of the market economy and the accelerated circulation of capital elements and resource allocation,routine loans under the guise of private lending to carry out illegal and criminal acts have caused serious social harm."Routing loans" is not a criminal law concept,nor is it a crime.It is also different from "usury loans".Routine loans are essentially a series of illegal and criminal acts that fraudulently borrow money from people's legal clothing.Routine loans vary in their behavioral methods,mainly using fast lending as a bait,creating default traps,layer-by-level accounting,creating a chain of evidence,charges for clever names,malicious litigation,and violent collection.Based on the essential purpose of illegal possession of property,it can be seen that the crime of infringing property is a basic crime commonly violated by routine loans.But as a concept of non-criminal law,we must strictly abide by the principle of statutory punishment for criminalization of an act,take the criminal constitution in the criminal law as the basis for determining the crime,and let our eyes go back and forth between norms and reality.Convictions and sentencing,so routine loan cases can constitute fraud,extortion,theft,kidnapping,provocation,crime of illegal detention,etc.Based on the obvious profiteering properties,routine loans have often formed a criminal chain after development,showing a tight and increasingly detailed gang model.On the issue of joint crimes,we should adopt common behaviors to identify co-principles of routine crimes.According to the size of each accomplice in the formation of conspiracy and the implementation of joint crimes,we should distinguish the principal and subordinate offenders based on the facts of division of labor.In individual cases,the combination of different criminal methods may lead to a very different determination of the number of crimes.When handling a case,judicial staff need to start around the two stages of fictitious claims and illegal debt collection.",And whether there is any implication of competition.In determining the amount of routine loan crimes,it should be distinguished from private lending,the concept of overall property should be introduced,and the overall evaluation should be negatively evaluated.In the process of realizing false claims,the repayment amount negotiated by both parties can be reduced from the amount of crime.Deducted.At the same time,it is necessary to avoid "crime of pocket" to criminalize routine loans.In addition,because routine loan cases are mostly camouflage,and they appear in the form of non-governmental legal loans on the appearance after multiple packaging,judges often support the actor's claim and obtain civil legal support according to the probabilistic proof standards of civil lawsuits.And won a successful trial in civil trials,resulting in civil judgments become "accomplices" in criminal crimes.On the basis of the doctrine of illegal pluralism,conflicts between criminal and civil entities can be smoothed,and the theoretical obstacles of criminal illegality can be identified and pursued even if the routine loan is successful in civil lawsuits,and this type of use of civil law can be effectively combated Norms and violations of legal interests in the manner of case and fact finding rules.In judicial practice,an effective screening and transfer mechanism should be established,strict evidence review,reasonable allocation of burden of proof,appropriate reduction of transfer standards,and a precise crackdown on routine loan crimes.In addition,it is necessary to avoid the expansion of the criminal regulation of private lending behaviors,and effective and effective private lending behaviors that express true and effective intentions between parties and do not violate the legal benefits of criminal law must be respected and effectively protected.