Don't talk about grades No one here wants scores, so they can't be spent as money. Good luck.
/%CA%DC%BB%DF%B0%B8
Article 385 Any state functionary who takes advantage of his position to extort money or property from others, or illegally accepts money or property from others to seek benefits for others, is guilty of accepting bribes.
State functionaries who, in violation of state regulations, accept kickbacks and handling fees in various names in economic exchanges and own them personally shall be punished as accepting bribes.
Article 386 Provisions on Punishment of Bribery Whoever commits a crime of accepting bribes shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of Article 383 of this Law according to the amount and circumstances of accepting bribes. Whoever asks for a bribe will be punished more severely.
Article 387 A unit commits the crime of accepting bribes. State organs, state-owned companies, enterprises, institutions and people's organizations that extort or illegally accept other people's property and seek benefits for others, if the circumstances are serious, shall be fined, and the persons who are directly in charge and other persons who are directly responsible shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than five years or criminal detention.
Units listed in the preceding paragraph who secretly accept kickbacks and handling fees in various names in economic exchanges outside the account shall be punished as bribery and punished in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph.
Article 388 Any state functionary who, by taking advantage of his power or position, seeks illegitimate interests for the client through the acts of other state functionaries and extorts or accepts the client's property shall be punished as the crime of accepting bribes.
Official Reply of the Supreme People's Procuratorate on Relevant Issues Concerning Handling Bribery Cases of Retired State Staff
(Gao Jianfa Yanzi [1993]No. 10)
Liaoning Provincial People's Procuratorate:
Your bureau's "Request for Instructions on When to Start Calculating the Time when Retired State Staff Constitute the Subject of Bribery Crime" has been received. After studying and soliciting opinions from the Supreme People's Court, we hereby reply as follows:
After the promulgation and implementation of the Supplementary Provisions of the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) on Punishing Corruption and Bribery Crimes, the answers should be applied to the cases of accepting bribes by retired national staff before the release of the "two highs" answers, and the cases that have been dealt with before the release of the answers cannot be changed.
This reply
1993165438+10/0.
Notice of the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Supreme People's Court on Seriously Investigating Serious Bribery Criminals while Handling Major Cases of Bribery Crimes
Higher People's Courts, People's Procuratorates, Military Courts and Military Procuratorates of all provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government:
In recent years, people's courts at all levels and people's procuratorates have severely punished a number of criminals who have taken bribes seriously, and achieved good social results. However, there are still some criminals who bribe and corrupt state employees, but they have not been investigated by law. They continue to commit bribery crimes, which seriously endangers the construction of a clean government of the party and the country. In order to severely punish serious bribery crimes according to law, we hereby notify you as follows:
First, we must fully understand the significance of severely punishing bribery crimes for fully implementing the anti-corruption work of the CPC Central Committee, deepening the anti-corruption struggle, and curbing and preventing bribery crimes from the source. People's courts at all levels and people's procuratorates should take the serious punishment of bribery crimes as an important and urgent task in the anti-corruption struggle. While continuing to severely punish bribery criminals, we should severely punish and resolutely crack down on serious bribery criminals according to law.
Two, to seek illegitimate interests and bribery, constitutes a crime of bribery, bribery to the unit, the unit must be investigated for criminal responsibility according to law. "Seeking illegitimate interests" refers to seeking benefits that violate laws, regulations, national policies and the provisions of various departments in the State Council, and asking state staff or relevant units to provide help or convenience for acts that violate laws, regulations, national policies and the provisions of various departments in the State Council.
Bribery introduced to state functionaries, which constitutes a crime, should also be investigated and dealt with according to law.
Three, at present, we should pay special attention to severely punish the following serious bribery crimes according to law:
1, the amount of bribes is huge, and many times or many people are bribed;
2. Bribery to party and government cadres and judicial staff;
3, for smuggling, tax evasion, tax fraud, foreign exchange fraud, illegal trading of foreign exchange and other illegal and criminal activities, to the customs, industry and commerce, taxation, foreign exchange management and other administrative law enforcement agencies to pay bribes;
4. Bribery to the staff of banks and other financial institutions and securities management institutions, and illegal handling of financial and securities business, resulting in heavy losses to national interests;
5. Bribery to the relevant competent departments and their leaders, and illegal acquisition of project development rights, contracting rights and management rights, resulting in heavy losses to public property, national and people's interests;
6, because of the manufacture and sale of fake and shoddy products, causing serious consequences to the relevant state organs, state-owned units and state functionaries;
7. Other serious bribery crimes.
Four, in the investigation of serious bribery, bribery crimes, we must adhere to the principle of severe punishment, but also pay attention to reflect the policy. If a briber or a briber has the circumstances stipulated in the second paragraph of Article 390 and the second paragraph of Article 392 of the Criminal Law, and voluntarily confessed the bribery situation and introduced the circumstances of the bribery crime before being prosecuted, the punishment may be mitigated or exempted respectively according to law; If the briber or briber truthfully introduces the bribery situation after being prosecuted, he may also be given a lighter punishment as appropriate.
Five, in the serious investigation and punishment of serious bribery, bribery crime cases, we should pay attention to the struggle strategy, pay attention to working methods. It is necessary to organically combine the investigation and handling of major cases of bribery crimes with the investigation and handling of serious bribery crimes, so as to crack down on bribery crimes and promote the investigation and handling of major cases of bribery crimes and promote the comprehensive and in-depth investigation and handling of corruption and bribery cases.
Six, people's courts at all levels and people's procuratorates should combine the handling of bribery cases, conscientiously sum up experience and lessons, find out the existing problems, and put forward practical solutions to change the situation of ineffective crackdown on serious bribery crimes. The Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate should report any problems in their work in time.
Please follow the above notice carefully.
The Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Supreme People's Court.
1March 4, 999
Wang Xiaoshi and other bribery cases
Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court
criminal judgement
(2005) No.3580 Zi Chu, the first middle punishment.
The first branch of Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate, the public prosecution organ.
Defendant Wang Xiaoshi, male, 44 years old (born on May 2, 196 1), Han nationality, born in Dalian, Liaoning Province, with a university degree, is an assistant researcher of the issuance and examination committee of the issuance supervision department of China Securities Regulatory Commission, and lives in Xicheng District, Beijing. On June 4, 2004, he was criminally detained on suspicion of accepting bribes, and was arrested on June 6, 2004. Now detained in Beijing detention center.
Defenders: Tian Wenchang and Meng Bing, lawyers of Beijing Kyoto Law Firm.
Defendant Lin Bi, male, 36 years old (1born on April 20th, 969), Han nationality, born in Pingtan County, Fujian Province, university degree, CEO of Beijing Huazhang Investment Management Co., Ltd., living in Gulou District, Fuzhou City, Fujian Province. On June 4, 2004, he was detained on suspicion of accepting bribes, and was arrested on June 6, 2004. Now detained in Beijing detention center.
Defenders: Jiang Guanghui and Panther Chen, lawyers of Beijing Jintai Law Firm.
The First Branch of Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate accused the defendant Wang Xiaoshi of accepting bribes, the defendant Lin Bi of accepting bribes, and the company personnel of accepting bribes with the indictment No.52 (2005), and filed a public prosecution with our hospital on June 24, 2005. Our court formed a collegiate bench in accordance with the law and heard the case in public according to the law. The first branch of the Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate appointed Deputy Prosecutor Di to appear in court to support the public prosecution. Defendant Wang Xiaoshi and his defenders Tian Wenchang and Meng Bing, Defendant Lin Bi and his defenders Jiang Guanghui and Panther Chen attended the proceedings. The trial is now over.
The indictment of the First Branch of Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate alleges that:
(1) From February to September, 2002, the defendants Wang Xiaoshi and Lin Bi conspired to take advantage of Wang Xiaoshi's position as an assistant researcher of the audit committee of China Securities Regulatory Commission, and accepted the entrustment of Fujian Zhu Feng Textile Technology Co., Ltd. to help the company apply for listing through the position of other staff of the audit committee of China Securities Regulatory Commission, and then the two men shared the stolen goods.
(2) In March and April, 2002, the defendant Lin Bi took advantage of his position as the head of Fuzhou office of Northeast Securities Co., Ltd. to ask Gansu Yasheng Industrial (Group) Co., Ltd. for a bribe of RMB 3 1.8 million in the process of applying for issuing convertible corporate bonds through Shenzhen Stock Exchange.
The First Branch of the Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate collected from our hospital the witness testimony, the defendant's confession, the arrest process and documentary evidence accusing the defendant Wang Xiaoshi of taking bribes, the defendant Lin Bi of taking bribes and the company personnel of taking bribes. It is believed that the defendant Wang Xiaoshi, as a national staff member, ignored the national laws, took advantage of his position, collaborated with the defendant Lin Bi, and sought illegitimate interests for the trustee through the behavior of other national staff members, demanding the trustee's property, which was huge and serious. As a staff member of a limited liability company, the defendant Lin Bi ignored the national laws and took advantage of his position to ask for the property of the trustee and seek benefits for the trustee. The amount is huge. The actions of the defendants Wang Xiaoshi and Lin Bi violated the provisions of Article 388 and the first paragraph of Article 385 of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC); The defendant Lin Bi's behavior violated the provisions of Article 163 of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), and Wang Xiaoshi's behavior constituted the crime of accepting bribes; Lin Bi's behavior has constituted the crime of accepting bribes and the crime of accepting bribes by company personnel, which is submitted to our court for punishment according to law.
Defendant Wang Xiaoshi argued during the trial that he did not collude with Lin Bi to collect RMB 6,543.8+0.4 million from Zhu Feng Company, nor did he get RMB 6,543.8+0.4 million; He never took advantage of his position to benefit others.
The defense opinion of the defendant Wang Xiaoshi's defender is: Wang Xiaoshi did not use the convenient conditions formed by his authority or position to seek benefits for others; He did not seek illegitimate interests for the trustee through the behavior of other national staff; Lin Bi and Wang Xiaoshi do not constitute a joint crime.
The defendant Lin Bi argued in the trial that it is his duty to help enterprises do projects and do public relations work; Gansu Yasheng Company's application for issuing convertible bonds has nothing to do with the service fee charged by Yasheng according to the agreement.
Defendant Lin Bi's defense opinions are as follows: Because Wang Xiaoshi's evidence of accepting bribes is insufficient and Lin Bi lacks the premise of accepting bribes, the two do not constitute accomplices. Lin bi's behavior conforms to the characteristics of introducing bribery; Lin Bi did not take advantage of his position in the case of Yasheng Company, and it was his normal business behavior to charge 3 1.8 million yuan.
It was found through trial that:
1.From March to September, 2002, defendant Wang Xiaoshi accepted the entrustment of Fujian Zhu Feng Textile Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Zhu Feng Company) through the introduction of defendant Lin Bi, who was then a staff member of Northeast Securities Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Northeast Securities Company), taking advantage of his position as assistant researcher of the issuance and examination committee of China Securities Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as China Securities Commission). Wang Xiaoshi accepted bribes of RMB726,000 from the trustee through Lin Bi, in order to seek illegitimate interests for Zhu Feng Company in the process of applying for initial public offering through the actions of other staff of the issuance supervision department of CSRC.
In the meantime, the defendant Lin Bi took advantage of his position in Northeast Securities Company to accept a bribe of RMB674,000 from Zhu Feng Company while participating in the underwriting of Zhu Feng Company's initial stock issuance business by Northeast Securities Company.
The above facts are confirmed by the following evidence presented in court and cross-examined, which is confirmed by our court:
......
2. In March and April of 2002, the defendant Lin Bi took advantage of his position in Northeast Securities Company to underwrite the 200 1 convertible corporate bond business issued by Gansu Yasheng Industrial (Group) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Yasheng Company), and asked Yasheng Company for a bribe of RMB 310.8 million while helping Lin Bi communicate with the auditors of Shenzhen Stock Exchange.
The above facts are confirmed by the following evidence presented in court and cross-examined, which is confirmed by our court:
......
Defendant Wang Xiaoshi, his defender and defendant Lin Bi's defender's arguments and defense opinions that Wang Xiaoshi and Lin Bi do not constitute accomplices in the crime of accepting bribes. After investigation, the evidence cross-examined in court can't prove that Wang Xiaoshi and Lin Bi conspired to take bribes of RMB 6,543,800+0.4 million from Zhu Feng Company, and there is not enough evidence to identify them as accomplices in bribery. Therefore, this defense and defense opinion of the defendant and defender was adopted by our court.
Defender Wang Xiaoshi's defense opinion holds that Wang Xiaoshi didn't take advantage of his authority or position to benefit others. After investigation, from March to September, 2002, although Wang Xiaoshi was sent by the CSRC to Shenzhen Stock Exchange to engage in the preparatory work for the entrepreneurial edition, his cadre and personnel relations were still with the CSRC and still belonged to the staff of the CSRC, and he returned to the issuance supervision department of the CSRC in April, 2003. Therefore, when Zhu Feng Company applied for listing approval, Wang Xiaoshi took advantage of his convenience as the staff of the issuance supervision department of the CSRC in contacting the auditors of the issuance supervision department of the CSRC for the trustee and dredging the relationship. Therefore, this defense opinion of the defender was not adopted by our court.
Defender Wang Xiaoshi's defense opinion holds that Wang Xiaoshi did not seek illegitimate interests for the trustee through the actions of other state employees. After investigation, it is impossible for Wang Xiaoshi to directly ask Zhu Feng Company for an approval as soon as possible through the convenience of his position. Therefore, Wang Xiaoshi was asked by Zhu Feng Company to outsource the auditor of the issuance supervision department of the CSRC, and both Wang Xiaoshi and the trustee asked the auditor to handle this request as soon as possible. Regarding Zhu Feng Company's request for approval of listing application as soon as possible, the existing evidence can't prove that there was a delay in the process of listing approval. Under the condition that its application was approved according to due process, this entrustment of Zhu Feng Company belongs to illegitimate interests, so in this case, Wang Xiaoshi sought illegitimate interests for the trustee through the behavior of other national staff. Therefore, this defense opinion of the defender will not be adopted by this court.
Defendant Lin Bi and his defenders' arguments and defense opinions that Lin Bi's collection from Yasheng Company has nothing to do with Yasheng Company's issuance of convertible bonds. After investigation, after Yasheng Company signed an underwriting agreement with Northeast Securities Company to issue convertible bonds, Lin Bi was arranged by Northeast Securities Company to assist the project team. In the process, Lin Bi asked Yasheng Company for the necessary expenses. Lin Bi has proved in many confessions that the purpose of the financial advisory agreement signed between Dongfang Zongheng Company and Yasheng Company is to ask Yasheng Company to pay for it, and the content of the agreement does not actually exist. Therefore, this defense and defense opinion of the defendant and his defender will not be adopted by this court.
We believe that the defendant Wang Xiaoshi, as a state functionary, used his authority or position to seek illegitimate interests for the trustee through the behavior of other state functionaries, and accepted bribes of RMB726,000 from the trustee through others, which constituted the crime of accepting bribes, and the amount of bribes was huge, which should be punished according to law. Defendant Lin Bi, as a staff member of Northeast Securities Company, took advantage of his position to ask for and accept a bribe of 992,000 yuan from the company that signed an underwriting agreement with Northeast Securities Company. His behavior has constituted the crime of accepting bribes by company personnel, and the amount of bribes is huge, which should be punished according to law. Defendant Lin Bi helped Zhu Feng Company to pay bribes to Wang Xiaoshi during the application for listing. If the circumstances are serious, his behavior has constituted the crime of introducing bribery, which should be combined with the crime of accepting bribes by company personnel. The First Branch of the Beijing Municipal People's Procuratorate accused the defendant Wang Xiaoshi of accepting bribes and the defendant Lin Bi of accepting bribes from company personnel. The charges were accurate and they were found guilty. However, in the first fact charged in the indictment, there is insufficient evidence that Wang Xiaoshi and Lin Bi jointly took bribes of RMB 6,543,800+0.4 million. Wang Xiaoshi accepted 726,000 yuan from Zhu Feng Company through Lin Bi, and the defendant Lin Bi introduced 726,000 yuan to Wang Xiaoshi, which constituted the crime of introducing bribery. Lin Bi accepted 674,000 yuan from Zhu Feng Company, which constituted the crime of accepting bribes by company personnel. Defendant Lin Bi's defense opinion holds that Lin Bi gave money from Zhu Feng Company to Wang Xiaoshi, which belongs to the crime of introducing bribery, and this court adopted it. According to the facts, nature and circumstances of the crimes committed by the defendants Wang Xiaoshi and Lin Bi and the degree of harm to society, and in accordance with the provisions of Articles 388, 386, 383, paragraph 1 (1), 163, 392, paragraph 1, 69, 61 and 64 of the Criminal Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), the verdict is as follows:
1. Defendant Wang Xiaoshi was convicted of accepting bribes, sentenced to 13 years' imprisonment and confiscated personal property of RMB 120,000.
(The term of imprisonment shall be counted from the date of execution of this judgment. If a person is detained before the execution of the judgment, one day of detention shall be reduced to one day of fixed-term imprisonment, that is, from June 4, 2004 to June 3, 20117. )
2. Defendant Lin Bi was convicted of accepting bribes from company personnel, sentenced to nine years' imprisonment and confiscated personal property of RMB 100,000. He was convicted of introducing bribery and sentenced to one year and six months in prison. Decided to execute a fixed-term imprisonment of 10 years and confiscate personal property of RMB100000 yuan. (The term of imprisonment shall be counted from the execution date of this judgment. If the person is detained before the execution of the judgment, one day of detention shall be reduced to one day of imprisonment, that is, from June 4, 2004 to June 3, 2065, 438+065,438+065,438+2004. )
Three, the seizure of money and goods shall be confiscated or returned (list attached).
4. Continue to recover the insufficient illegal gains from the defendants Wang Xiaoshi and Lin Bi and confiscate them.
If you refuse to accept this judgment, you can appeal to the Beijing Higher People's Court through our court or directly within ten days from the second day of receiving this judgment. If a written appeal is filed, an original and a copy of the appeal shall be submitted.
Chief Justice Song Zhiyu, Judge Shi Zhi acting for Judge Fang Guan 20051February 9.
Bookkeeper Jiang Wei (judgment document)