JHASS
On the Judicial Dispute and Perfection of “Illegal Possession Purpose” in the Crime of Fund-raising Fraud
TOTAL VIEWS: 709
Abstract
To determine whether the perpetrator has committed the crime of fundraising fraud, the main focus is on examining whether they had the "intent of unlawful appropriation." The determination of whether the fundraiser has the "purpose of illegal possession" is often inferred through judicial interpretation, symposium minutes, and other pertinent judicial documents. However, judicial presumption has its limitations. In practice, there are some disputes about the circumstances under which the perpetrator is presumed to have the "intent of illegal possession". For example, can the objective inability to return identify the perpetrator with an "illegal possession purpose"? Does "borrowing the new to return the old" imply an "illegal possession purpose"? How should we understand the concept of "profligate"? This paper mainly discusses three controversial points and proposes some practical suggestions regarding the presumption process in criminal law. It advocates following the modest requirements of criminal law, rejecting the theory of harm only, adhering to a comprehensive judgment of the entire case, and allowing the use of counterevidence to challenge the presumption. The aim is to offer theoretical guidance for judicial practice.
References
Cai Fuhua. (2022). Misunderstanding and correction of "the purpose of illegal Possession". Straits Law, (03), 12-19+121.
Liang Yiru. (2021). The distinction between the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits and the crime of fund-raising fraud: Based on the legal interest of trust. Hebei Law School, (08), 169-185.
doi:10.16494/j.cnki.1002-3933.2021.08.011.
Liao Qizhi. (2017). Determination of the purpose of illegal possession in illegal fund-raising. People's Justice (Cases), (11), 42-44.
Liu Wei. (2021). The judicial dilemma of the crime of fund-raising fraud and the improvement of the crime group legislation. Politics and Law, (05), 38-48. doi:10.15984/j.cnki.1005-9512.2021.05.004.
Research Group of Beijing Chaoyang District People's Procuratorate & Zhang Zhaoxia. (2021). Research on Judicial Presumption of Illegal Possession Purpose of fund-raising Fraud Crime. Chinese Prosecutors, (01), 29-33.
Xing Hongxia & Tian Ran. (2019). Proof Method and Limitation of Judicial Presumption: From the perspective of "illegal possession purpose" of fund-raising crime. Application of Law, (22), 77-86.
Zhang Yuan & Yu Xiaohang. (2020). The distinction between the crime of fund-raising fraud and the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits. People's Justice, (29), 29-31. doi:10.19684/j.cnki.1002-4603.2020.29.009.
Zhou Guangquan. (2010). Debate and Development of criminological system in China. Journal of the National Acade-my of Prosecutors, (01), 67-79.
How to cite this paper
On the Judicial Dispute and Perfection of “Illegal Possession Purpose” in the Crime of Fund-raising Fraud
How to cite this paper: Jianing Tang. (2024) On the Judicial Dispute and Perfection of “Illegal Possession Purpose” in the Crime of Fund-raising Fraud. Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Science, 8(2), 491-495.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/jhass.2024.02.033
More Articles
- How to Enhance Elderly Life Satisfaction in China?—Exploring the Impact of Economic and Non-economic Factors
- Concept of Modernity: Liu Haisu’s Path to Reform in Chinese Contemporary Art
- Playing with B-boy: Course Assessment of Breakdance Based on OBE Concepts
- Using Written Corrective Feedback to Eliminate Japanese University Students’ Use of Sentence-initial Conjunctions
- Pig Breeding and Improvement of Living Conditions of Rural People: Case of the Zone of Rubirizi in Mutimbuzi Commune in Burundi
- Erratum：A Practical Study of Integrating Chinese Traditional Culture into the Research Curriculum Mode