On the problem of engraving official seal privately and stealing official seal

The actor's unauthorized engraving of the official seal refers to the behavior of non-unit staff or staff of the unit who steal the name of the unit to engrave the official seal for criminal activities without the knowledge of the unit. Under normal circumstances, the unit is unaware of the fact that the perpetrator privately engraved the official seal to carry out criminal activities. The act of stealing the official seal of the unit refers to the act of stealing the official seal of the unit by taking advantage of his position or other secret means and committing economic crimes. The difference between the two acts is obvious, and the act of privately engraving the official seal itself constitutes a crime. It is not necessarily a crime for the actor to engrave the official seal privately, which directly infringes on the name right of the company that engraves the official seal privately and the state's management of the seal engraving. The theft of the official seal by the perpetrator does not necessarily constitute a crime, but it directly violates the management and use rights of the company whose official seal was stolen. Whether the damage caused by the perpetrator's criminal behavior to the victim is related to the unit is an important criterion to distinguish the crime of private engraving and stealing the official seal of the unit.

1, the fault of the unit in the case of private seal.

In the case of engraving the official seal privately, because the unit that engraves the official seal privately is unaware of the act of engraving the official seal privately, the criminal act of engraving the official seal privately has nothing to do with the unit. And there is no legal causal relationship between the damage result caused by criminal behavior and the unit. Therefore, under normal circumstances, the unit should not bear civil liability.

However, in another case, if the unit already knows the fact that the actor holds the company name seal and uses it to carry out economic crimes, but for the sake of the reputation, interests or other interests of the unit, it does not take any judicial relief measures to stop the criminal activities of the actor's private seal, and takes a laissez-faire attitude towards the actor's holding of the official seal to commit crimes, resulting in the actor using the private seal to commit economic crimes again, causing economic losses to a bona fide third party. At this time, in this case, the losses caused to the bona fide third party shall be borne by the actor first, and the insufficient part shall be borne by the unit with private seal.

2. The fault of the unit in the case of stealing the official seal.

There are usually two situations to steal the company's official seal: first, the actor takes advantage of the company's negligence in official seal management or takes advantage of his own management and use of official seal to steal the company's official seal; Second, the perpetrator used criminal means (such as theft) to steal the official seal of the unit. Article 5 of the "Several Provisions" does not think that units are at fault for stealing official seals and signing economic contracts to commit economic crimes, and makes a principled provision that they generally do not bear civil liability. However, if the perpetrator commits a crime of stealing the official seal of the unit, if the unit is indifferent to the losses suffered by a bona fide third party, whether it is at fault or not, it is deemed that the unit is not at fault, thus being completely exempted from liability, which obviously does not conform to the principle of fairness in fault. Therefore, in judicial practice, if it can be confirmed that the unit whose official seal has been stolen has committed criminal activities and caused great economic losses due to major mistakes in official seal management, the unit whose official seal has been stolen shall be deemed to be at fault and may be ordered to bear supplementary liability for compensation. That is, according to the principle of "exemption for minor negligence and compensation for gross negligence", it can better reflect the judicial concept of fairness and justice.

Please look at the following case:

Yesterday, the reporter learned from Xiufeng Court that Xie had been prosecuted by the procuratorate for allegedly forging the official seal, and Xiufeng Court had accepted the case. It is reported that 40-year-old Xie is an employee of an industrial company in our city. Last year, Xie booked a house for promotion, paid a down payment, and then began to apply for housing provident fund loans.

Guilin Life Network News (Guilin Evening News reporter Yang Yan correspondent Rena Yang Jilin) What should I do if I want to buy a house but I don't have enough money? The man Xie Mou chose a loan like most people, but the loan was cheated by his private official seal. Yesterday, the reporter learned from Xiufeng Court that Xie had been prosecuted by the procuratorate for allegedly forging the official seal, and Xiufeng Court had accepted the case. It is reported that 40-year-old Xie is an employee of an industrial company in our city. Last year, Xie booked a house for promotion, paid a down payment, and then began to apply for housing provident fund loans. But Xie asked the company to help seal the loan, but he couldn't get the consent, and the loan was delayed for several months. 20 15, 10 One day in June, Xie saw a small advertisement in the street for various certificates, and immediately thought of the certificate that needed the company's seal, so he called the number on the leaflet and asked for his company's seal. The other party quickly delivered the forged company seal to Xie, and then Xie used the seal to borrow more than 2 10000 yuan from the provident fund center. At the end of June 5438+ 10 this year, the company learned that Xie had not sealed the provident fund loan and reported the case to the public security organ. 1 At the end of the year, Xie was arrested by the public security organs. The procuratorate believes that Xie forged the company seal and his behavior violated the provisions of the Criminal Law. The facts of the crime are clear and the evidence is indeed sufficient. He should be investigated for criminal responsibility for forging seals, so he filed a public prosecution with Xiufeng Court. At present, the case has been accepted and will be heard in Xiufeng Court in the near future.