Research On The Bounds Between The Crime Of Fundraising Fraud And The Crime Of Illegally Pooling Public Savings

The crime of fund-raising fraud and illegally pooling public savings belong to illegal fund-raising crimes.they are many obvious commonalities,and easy to be puzzled,resulting in controversial judicial decisions in many cases.At the same time,the means of two crimes are constantly being renovated,and the relevant administrative regulations are also constantly updated,which has led to great controversy over the meanings of some basic elements in the composition of the two crimes,which has increased the complexity of the clear demarcation of the two crimes.Although there are constantly updated judicial interpretations for guidance,the judicial interpretations that only make general provisions still need to be re-interpreted to make up for their deficiencies and clarify their confusion.The distinction between the two crimes needs to be screened from the perspective of the constituent elements of the crime.The most basic work is to accurately define the basic concepts in the constituent elements of the two crimes,such as the public,illegal fundraising,fraud methods,and the purpose of illegal administration.The article is mainly divided into four parts.The first part clarifies the differences of the two crimes in the object of crime.The target of the crime of fund-raising fraud is the state’s monetary administrate regulations and the right to dominate public and private goods,the former being the main object and the latter being the secondary object.The target of the crime of illegally pooling public savings is only the former.The second part clarifies the objective differences of the two crimes,and focuses on the differences in the behavior objects and behaviors of the two crimes.The target of the crime of fund-raising fraud is a general "public",including infefinite target and definite majority,while the target of the crime of illegally pooling public savings is only a narrow "public",that is,an indefinite target.the meanings of "public" are different in the respective contexts of the two crimes.Definite objects do not only refer to relatives,friends and internal personnel of the unit.indefinite objects should be judged based on "openness",and the risk ability of fund-raising participants and the social radiation of fund-raising behaviors should be examined.Does not affect.Secondly,the "fraud method" is not a unique way for the crime of fund-raising fraud,and it may also appear in the crime of illegally pooling public savings.The former crime is not an aggravated charge of the latter crime.The third part clarifies the subjective differences of the two crimes.The crime of fundraising fraud needs the intention of lawless domination,and the crime of illegally pooling public savings needs the intention of profit.Aiming at the problem of recognizing the intention of illegal domination,which is a heavy point in practice,the "two-way presumption standard system combining forward and reverse inference" has been improved.Point out the general identification principles to solve the problem in the absence of specific identification rules.The fourth part discusses the co-existence of the two crimes.The legal relationship between the two crimes is a cross relationship,and "no purpose of illegal possession" is only a superficial element of the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits,so there is a co-opetitive relationship between the two crimes.Using the recent research results of the academic circle on the co-opetition of legal provisions,it is pointed out that co-opetition between the two crimes is inclusive co-opetition and should be convicted and punished for the crime of fund-raising fraud.