Research On Judicial Difficult Issues Of The Crime Of Illegally Absorbing Public Deposits

In recent years,the incidence of illegal fund-raising crimes has been increasing year by year,which has attracted widespread attention from the legal academic and legal practice sectors.The most typical of these is the crime of illegal public deposit-taking,which has been occurring more frequently,with larger and larger values,a wider group of participants and more difficult evidence collection,making the task of preventing and resolving financial risks more difficult for the judiciary.The crime of illegal public deposit taking in China has some difficulties in terms of conviction and sentencing in judicial practice,and there are also many controversial and different views in the academic community at the theoretical level.Therefore,accurate identification and analysis of the problems of the crime of illegal public deposit in China's judicial practice can effectively combat the crime while also protecting the human rights of the perpetrators,reducing the risk to the public's property and maintaining the socialist market economic order.In this paper,we have taken a sample of 260 adjudication documents in Henan Province,which were obtained from the "No Lawsuit Network",and searched for criminal cases of illegal public deposits in Henan Province from 2016 to 2020,and obtained 239 valid adjudication documents after a series of screening.On the basis of the analysis of the relevant data values of the adjudication documents,we reveal the current judicial situation of illegal public deposit-taking cases,sort out the theoretical controversies of the crime of illegal public deposit-taking,identify the problems in the judicial determination of the crime of illegal public deposit-taking,and put forward suggestions to improve the judicial determination of the crime.Apart from the preface and concluding remarks,this article is divided into four parts.In the first part,this section is an overview of the offence,combing through the theoretical knowledge of the legislative background,legislative history,jurisprudential concepts and manifestations of the offence.Based on the combing and analysis,the more appropriate viewpoints are selected to provide theoretical support for the later part to discover the problems arising from the offence of illegal absorption of public deposits in the administration of justice.In the second part,this section analyses the data of 239 effective adjudication documents in Henan Province from 2016 to 2020.The dimensions of the analysis are from the year in which the crime case occurred,the amount of deposits absorbed by the perpetrator,the number of people to whom the perpetrator absorbed deposits,the amount of losses incurred by investors,whether the perpetrator constituted a unit crime,whether the perpetrator constituted a joint crime,whether the perpetrator used fraudulent means,the use of funds after the perpetrator absorbed them,the year in which the verdict was made,the outcome of the court verdict,the application of suspended sentences,and the amount of fines.This section provides basic data for the subsequent study of the problems of conviction and sentencing that arise in judicial practice in relation to the illegal absorption of public funds.Part ?,this part is an analysis of the difficult issues arising in the judicial determination of this offence.Through the analysis of the elements of the 239 selected judgments and the study of relevant theories in legal academia,it reveals the many difficulties in the judicial determination of this offence.Specifically,these include:the controversy over whether the perpetrator committed the offence,especially the difficulty of identifying this offence with the offences of private lending and capital raising fraud,the controversy over the determination of the total amount of deposits absorbed by the perpetrator,the controversy over the determination of whether the perpetrator was an accomplice,and the controversy over the determination of the mitigating circumstances of the sentencing.Part ?,this part is to put forward countermeasures and suggestions on the problems arising from this offence in judicial practice.This part is a response to the previous difficult issues,specifically including:accurately defining the crime and the non-crime,this crime and the other crime,improving the legislation on the determination of the amount of this crime,narrowing the scope of application of what constitutes a joint crime,and correctly and reasonably considering the circumstances of sentencing.