| The illegal absorption of public deposits disturbs the financial management order and easily causes the chaos of the socialist market economy order.Our country has long made preventing and punishing the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits an important task for maintaining social development order,and has achieved remarkable results.However,the different economic development conditions in different regions lead to different retrieval methods of similar cases and judgment results in different periods.The difference of judges’cognition,measure and basis of discretion,as well as the improper interference of the media,also have an impact on the sentencing result,leading to the phenomenon of different judgment in the similar cases of illegally absorbing public deposits in the trial practice,and the difference in sentencing standards.In contrast,foreign countries and regions have reference value in the regulation and identification of illegally absorbing public funds and the relevant measures when facing the problem of similar case retrieval.It plays a good role in the fight against the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits,and is worth using for reference.In order to alleviate the improper sentencing difference of the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits,we should adhere to the substantive balance of crime and punishment as the orientation and standardize the judge’s use of the discretionary power.At the same time,resolving the improper interference of extra-judicial factors and highlighting the influence of criminal factors on the penal adaptation also play a promoting role in alleviating the sentencing difference of the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits.On the judicial issue of the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits,the academic and practical scope have formed relatively abundant research results,such as the regulation path of the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits,the range of definition of the concept of the same cases,etc.On the basis of the existing results,further analyzing the reasons for the persistence of sentencing differences in the cases of the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits and the deficiencies of existing regulations,analyzing the current judicial application status of the cases of illegally absorbing public deposits through empirical analysis,investigating the beneficial experience from countries outside the region and using which for reference through comparative research and other methods will play an effective promoting role in alleviating the sentencing difference in the cases of illegally absorbing public deposits and realizing the substantive balance of crime and punishment. |
