Research On The "Purpose Of Illegal Possession" In The Crime Of Fundraising Fraud

The core problem of judging whether the perpetrator constitutes the crime of fund-raising fraud is to judge whether it has the purpose of "illegal possession" subjectively.As a subjective element of crime,the purpose of illegal possession is concealed and complicated,and it is often difficult to determine directly.Therefore,it needs to be presumed through the objective behavior shown by the perpetrator.Therefore,the Supreme People’s Court has issued a number of judicial interpretations and normative documents.Through the form of enumeration,it has summarized a variety of situations that can be identified as having the purpose of "illegal possession," in order to establish a unified determination standard.However,with the increase in fund-raising fraud cases and the diversification of criminal forms,this presumption model and the basis for determination have gradually revealed its limitations.Therefore,in order to improve the identification methods and meet the needs of judicial practice,the "purpose of illegal possession" of the crime of fund-raising fraud should be deeply analyzed and studied.The study of the "purpose of illegal possession" of the crime of fundraising fraud should first clarify its connotation.Through the analysis of the content of the "purpose of illegal possession" in criminal law theories at home and abroad,and then put it in the crime of fundraising fraud for a targeted analysis,it can be Clarification: The "purpose of illegal possession" in the crime of fundraising fraud refers to the intention of the actor to illegally control or dominate the funds raised based on the two meanings of exclusion and utilization,and to permanently exclude the right holder’s control or dominance.Analyzing the generation time of the crime of "illegal possession purpose" of the crime of fundraising fraud can be divided into three stages: before fundraising,during fundraising and after fundraising.After categorized discussion,it was concluded that only the "purpose of illegal possession" was formed before and during the fund-raising can be determined to constitute the crime,and the situation that the "purpose of illegal possession" was formed after the completion of fund-raising should not be regarded as the crime.At the same time,the subjective form of the crime of fund-raising fraud can only be direct intention,and the "purpose of illegal possession" is consistent with the time when the crime intentionally occurred.The determination of the "purpose of illegal possession" of the crime of fund-raising fraud is often based on relevant judicial interpretations and regulatory documents.Therefore,it is necessary to classify and discuss the circumstances stipulated in the provisions.Through analysis,it is found that the conditions for determining the "purpose of illegal possession" have been continuously expanded,from some illegal acts that clearly reflect the subjective attitude of the perpetrator,to the unreasonable use of funds raised,and then to the presumption of the perpetrator based solely on the results of non-repayment after the fact.The subjective attitude of "knowingly incapable of repayment".These determinations based on inductive reasoning cannot completely rule out reasonable doubts.Through further analysis of the corresponding problems in the identification process,it is believed that the improvement of the identification path needs to be carried out from the following two aspects: from a macro perspective,the principle of subjective and objective consistency should be adhered to,the comprehensive consideration of subjective and objective factors should be adhered to,and relevant judicial interpretations should be improved at the same time.Refine and supplement the basis for identification.From a micro perspective,the presumption rules for the "purpose of illegal possession" should be improved,a reverse presumption standard should be established in the judiciary,and the shortcomings of a single positive presumption model should be solved.At the same time,a multi-level and comprehensive evaluation method should be adopted to establish a "four points and one line"."Method of inference.It is also necessary to apply commercial thinking and pay attention to the characteristics of commercial affairs in the process of judicial confirmation.On the basis of grasping the particularity of the subject,respect the autonomy of merchants and ensure the normal operation of commercial enterprises.