Empirical Research On The Crime Of Covering Up Or Concealing The Proceeds Of Crime

The crime of covering up or concealing the proceeds of crime as stolen goods crime,because it obstructs the judicial management order,provides a protective umbrella for the crime,and then becomes the focus of the legislators.With the rapid development of economy and society,the behaviors and means of covering up and concealing crimes are constantly changing.Two judicial interpretations were promulgated to supplement and amend the incriminating standards,criminal acts,and sentencing circumstances of this crime.However,due to the peculiar lag of the law,in the face of new types of crimes,not only the determination of crime composition,but also the distinction between one crime and another crime and the discretion of punishment are unreasonable in judicial practice.Using the method of empirical analysis,the author deeply analyzes the root cause of the problem through the analysis of the judgment documents,combined with the existing theoretical experience,and puts forward some thoughts and opinions on the problems reflected in the judicial application of this crime,hoping to contribute my own strength.The full text is divided into four parts.The first part of the article is the introduction,which mainly expounds the research purpose and significance,research ideas and methods of this crime.In the second part,combines the 247 judgment documents of Shaanxi Province from 2018 to 2021 uploaded on the Internet of Chinese judgment documents as samples,the author comprehensively analyzes the current status of judicial application of the crime of covering up,concealing the proceeds of crime from three aspects: the identification of the constituent elements of the crime,the evaluation of the circumstances of sentencing,and the application of punishment.In the third part,through the above data statistics,the author finds that the crime has the following problems in the judicial application process: there are differences in the characterization of the behavior of helping with money withdrawal;some conviction and sentencing circumstances are false;the evaluation of the sentencing circumstances is not standardized;sentencing is unbalanced among downstream crimes,between natural person crimes and unit crimes;judicial organs pay too much attention to non-substantive factors in the application of suspended sentences,and have a biased understanding of the substantive elements.The fourth part puts forward corresponding suggestions for the above problems.First of all,the elements of scientific identification.On one hand,clarify the characterization of the behavior of helping with money withdrawal,one the other hand,clarify the interpretation of some legal provisions.Second,regulate the application of sentencing circumstances.Strengthen the description of sentencing circumstances,and clarify the applicable rules of sentencing circumstances.Finally,unify the standard of punishment discretion.Establish a sentencing guidance system,add unit crime qualification punishment,improve the supervision and auxiliary measures of punishment,and then standardize the application of probation,and finally realize the adaptation of the culpability of the crime.