If there is no subjective purpose of illegal possession, even if deception is used objectively, but the loan cannot be repaid temporarily due to objective reasons other than its will, it should be a civil loan dispute and the crime of fraud is not established. ?
Article 110 of the Criminal Procedure Law: Any unit or individual has the right and obligation to report or accuse a criminal fact or suspect to a public security organ, a people's procuratorate or a people's court. ?
The victim has the right to report and accuse the criminal facts or criminal suspects who infringe on his personal and property rights to the public security organs, people's procuratorates or people's courts. ?
Public security organs, people's procuratorates or people's courts shall accept reports, complaints and reports. If it does not belong to its own jurisdiction, it shall be transferred to the competent authority for handling, and the informant, complainant and informant shall be notified; For those who are not under their jurisdiction and must take emergency measures, they should take emergency measures first and then transfer them to the competent department. ?
Extended data:
?
Case: Borrowing money under the guise of "private lending" is not considered fraud?
From 2065438 to February 2004, the appellant Luo met the victim Li, an employee of Renxian Information Poverty Alleviation Service Center. From April 20 14 to June 20 1 10, Luo fabricated the fact that he needed funds to do projects in Chongqing, and borrowed money from Li for many times under the pretext of high interest rates. Li has misappropriated the mutual aid fund for poverty alleviation, which he managed, from 2,365,438 yuan+0,965,438 yuan+0,000 yuan to Luo.
Before the incident, Luo returned 276,000 yuan to Li, and the remaining 2043 100 yuan was used to repay debts and gambling. On July 24th, 20 15, the police of the county public security bureau arrested Luo at the exit of expressway, Kaixian county. It was also found out that after the incident, the plaintiff Luo provided clues to other people's crimes to the public security organs, which was verified.
After hearing the case, the county people's court held that the defendant Luo Mou fabricated facts, concealed the truth and defrauded others' property for the purpose of illegal possession, and the amount was extremely huge, which constituted a crime of fraud. Luo refused to accept the judgment of the first instance and appealed that the loan relationship with Li did not constitute a crime. ?
The focus of the dispute in this case is whether the appellant's behavior constitutes a crime of fraud because he borrowed money from the victim and used all the money to repay debts and gambling, which led to his inability to repay debts. ?
The county people's court held through trial that the defendant Luo Mou fabricated facts, concealed the truth and defrauded other people's property for the purpose of illegal possession, and the amount was extremely huge. His behavior has constituted a crime of fraud. The defendant Luo provided clues to other people's crimes to the public security organs, which were verified to be true and meritorious, and were given a lighter punishment. Luo was sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of 1 1 year and fined 500,000 yuan. Luo refused to accept the judgment of the first instance and appealed that the loan relationship with Li did not constitute a crime. ?
Chongqing No.4 Intermediate People's Court held through trial that the appellant Luo Mou concealed his insolvent financial situation, fabricated the fact that he was short of money in a project in Chongqing, and used high interest as bait, which made the victim Li mistakenly think that Luo Mou had a reliable investment project and had repayment ability, and misappropriated public funds of 23 19 1000 yuan for Luo Mou's use.
After Luo defrauded the funds, all the remaining funds were used for debt repayment, gambling and daily expenses except a small part, and the borrowed funds were not properly kept or reasonably invested, which made it impossible to return them. Although the relationship between Luo and Li is nominally a loan relationship, in fact, Luo has repeatedly defrauded others of huge amounts of property in the name of borrowing without repayment ability, and should be convicted and punished for fraud. Therefore, the appellant's excuse cannot be established, and this court will not accept it. Reject the appeal according to law and uphold the original judgment. ?
China Court Network-How should lenders protect their rights when borrowers are suspected of fraud?
Chongqing court network-borrowing money under the guise of "private lending" is not considered fraud.