Identification And Regulation Of False Litigation In Private Lending

As a diversified financing method,private lending has greatly promoted the formation and improvement of multi-level credit market.At the same time,the number of such cases increased rapidly,bringing new challenges to the trial work of people’s courts.In recent years,private lending has become the most frequent area of false litigation.In practice,there are many false civil actions which are carried out by means of fictitious debts and forged evidence.The actions not only disrupt the normal judicial order,infringes the legitimate rights and interests of the relevant right holders,but also has a bad impact on social stability.How to identify and regulate false litigation is a difficult problem to be solved in the trial of private lending cases.Based on the judicial practice of private lending in China,this paper focuses on the relevant civil judgment documents,explores the problems existing in the identification and regulation of false private lending litigation,and further proposes the corresponding improvement path.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,the paper is divided into four parts,which are arranged as follows:The first part is the empirical investigation of false litigation in private lending.There are some disputes about the extension of false litigation.Thus,it is necessary to clarify the specific connotation of false litigation and the object of this paper before sorting out the specific judgment documents.On this basis,through case analysis and statistics,this paper makes a comprehensive study and typology analysis on the false litigation in the judicial practice of private lending in China.The overall study is helpful for us to understand the common characteristics of false litigation in private lending,while the typology study is beneficial to show the differences between different types of cases,thus laying a foundation for the adoption of targeted regulatory measures in the following article.The second part is about the level of false litigation in private lending.As the main body of the trial,when judging whether there is malicious collusion between the two parties in the private lending cases,the court mainly has two problems: evidence examination and fact determination.In the examination of documents and statements of the parties,such as proof of creditor’s rights and transfer vouchers,the court presents a characteristic of arbitrariness,and fails to make a correct judgment on the authenticity of relevant evidence.At the same time,there are disputes about "probability advantage","high probability" and "beyond reasonable doubt" in the criterion of the court’s determination of false litigation.The third part is about the regulation of false litigation in private lending.It is necessary to provide an effective way of remedy to the outsider whose rights and interests are damaged.From the perspective of judicial practice,there are obstacles to the exercise of the remedy channels,such as bringing a new lawsuit,applying for a retrial,filing a lawsuit of execution objection or filing a lawsuit of cancellation of a third party.The current situation of rights protection by outsiders is not optimistic.However,from the perspective of the regulation measures of the false litigation actor,there are still some deficiencies in the judgment method and the specific content of the compulsory measures of "rejected request" stipulated in 112 of the current civil procedure law.In addition,there is also room for improvement of the related supporting systems such as the civil penalty convergence procedure and the procuratorial supervision mechanism to regulate the false litigation in private lending.The fourth part is about the identification and regulation of false litigation in private lending.Based on the analysis of the identification and regulation of false private lending litigation,this paper explores the corresponding improvement measures.It is said that for the identification of false litigation in private lending,the court should strictly examine the relevant evidence,conduct a detailed comparison and analysis of the parties’ statements and relevant documents,and timely find false litigation clues.Treat the party’s self-admission correctly and prevent the party from using the abuse of the self-admission rules as a means to seek illegitimate rights and interests.At the same time,the standard of the court’s evidence is further clarified,that is,if the determination of the false lawsuit reaches the level of "ignorance",the court can rule to reject the lawsuit.If the court intends to use the measures of fine or detention,it shall establish beyond reasonable doubt the facts of the malicious complicity of the parties.For the regulation of false litigation in private lending,it is necessary to apply the punishment measures of infringer correctly and improve the specific content of compulsory measures.At the same time,it is necessary to improve the relief channels of the outsider in the case,introduce the prevention of fraud to participate in the lawsuit,improve the plaintiff’s eligibility for the third party to withdraw the lawsuit,and give the outsider in the case of damaged rights and interests the right to Sue for tort damages.Finally,through the coordination of civil penalty procedures and the improvement of the supervision mechanism,further improve the private lending false litigation supporting measures.