After investigation, up to the time of the case, Gui Hanxin and Ai Shicai had sold a total of 2,136,200 shares of the shares of the above-mentioned five unlisted companies to 316 investors (originally the five companies did not have so many shares, and after the shares were subdivided, the company's shares increased), with a total sales amount of 7,698,300 yuan, from which they made a profit of more than 3.1 million yuan.

Practice has proved that no matter how the relevant departments publicize and educate, and how the police warn the people, there will always be many people who dream of getting rich overnight, desperate to rush to the distant and illusory profiteering, and finally make a mess of chicken feathers.

After the incident, the defendant's family found Mr. Liu, the legal counsel of Wanli Investment Co., Ltd., and entrusted him and his colleagues to defend the two defendants.

A year later, the case of Gui Hanxin and Ai Shicai was transferred by the procuratorate to the Municipal Intermediate People's Court, which heard the case a week earlier.

Defendants Gui Hanxin and Ai Shicai and their defenders have no objection to the basic facts alleged in the indictment.

The defender believes that the three defendants do not constitute the crime of illegal business operation, and the main reasons are as follows:

First, the defendant and the defendant were engaged in property rights transfer business, not securities business;

Second, the equity of an unlisted company limited by shares can be transferred in accordance with the law, and the acts of the defendant and the defendant are lawful;

Third, after the defendant unit and the defendant were approved by the industrial and commercial department to add the item of "application procedures for property rights transactions", they had reasonable trust in the legality of the business scope and subjectively had no criminal intent, so their acts did not constitute the crime of illegal business operation.

After the trial, the collegial panel made a judgment in court.

The Intermediate People's Court held that the defendants Gui Hanxin and Ai Shicai exceeded the business scope of the company approved and registered by the industry and commerce, transferred the equity of a non-listed company limited by shares to the public without the approval of the statutory authority, and continued to operate beyond the scope of business on the grounds of adding the business project of "applying for property rights transactions" after being administratively punished for exceeding the scope of operation, and did not stop the business activities after the relevant administrative law enforcement department pointed out that they had no right to operate, and their behavior was an illegal operation of securities business without approval and disrupted the national securities market. And the circumstances of the crime are particularly serious, and all of them have constituted the crime of illegal business operation.

The two defendants established a company for the purpose of illegally engaging in securities business, and the company's main activity was to illegally engage in securities business after its establishment, so it cannot be treated as a unit crime, and shall be found to be a crime committed by a natural person. The public prosecution's accusation that this case was a crime committed by a unit is improper and should be corrected.

In accordance with the provisions of Article 225 (3), Article 25 Paragraph 1 and Article 64 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, the judgment is as follows:

1. Defendant Gui Hanxin committed the crime of illegal business operation and was sentenced to five years and six months imprisonment and a fine of 3.2 million yuan.

2. Defendant Ai Shicai committed the crime of illegal business operation and was sentenced to five years and six months imprisonment and a fine of 3.2 million yuan.

3. The stolen money illegally obtained by the two defendants shall continue to be recovered.

After the first-instance judgment was pronounced, the two defendants appealed to the Provincial High Court on the grounds that the agency transfer of the equity of an unlisted joint-stock company was not engaged in securities business, did not exceed the scope of business, and did not have criminal intent. At present, the second-instance trial of the case has not yet begun.

After the first-instance verdict was announced, someone recommended a lawyer in Beijing to the defendant's family, and later the defendant's family could not make up their minds, so they found Mr. Gui, who was the general manager of legal affairs in the company (Mr. Gui had some relatives with the defendant Gui Hanxin), and asked him to help.

"Lawyer Liu, I have something unclear and want to ask you." A local lawyer surnamed Wang opposite Fang Yi was the first to speak.

"You say." Lawyer Liu is very polite.

"Didn't the second defendant intend to do serious investment business when he established Wanli Investment Co., Ltd. at the beginning? Why did the court find that the two defendants set up the company for illegally operating securities business? Lawyer Wang asked the other four experts questions.

"That's right, there's a little episode in it. When the second defendant set up the company before, there was a promise of investment by the financier, but the promise was not fulfilled later. The second defendant felt that it was troublesome to file a tax return if the company had no business, so he applied for the company to be deregistered.

Because I have just registered for less than a month and have no business, it is very convenient to cancel it.

However, after the two defendants made a lot of money in the market, they found that they could make money by transferring the shares of the modern office, and then went to an intermediary agency to stop the cancellation, but the cancellation process was completed.

There was no way, in order to do the business of acting as an agent for share transfer, the two re-registered Wanli Investment Co., Ltd. We only found out about this when we were reading the papers.

In my opinion, the focus of this case is mainly on:

1. Does the agency transfer of equity of a non-listed company belong to the securities business provided for in Article 225 (3) of the Criminal Law?

2. Does the conduct of the two defendants constitute the crime of illegal business operation?

I would like to invite you to the seminar to discuss these two points and listen to your suggestions. Lawyer Liu said, looking at Mr. Gui, who nodded his head in recognition of what he said.

Fang Yi's face was expressionless, but his heart was open: the materials provided before were flawed, was this deliberately done by lawyer Liu to confuse the public, or was the paralegal careless mistake! This kind of thing happened in the first place, and this seminar was held...... It's kind of interesting.

After listening to Mr. Liu's words, everyone began to use their brains, in fact, the focus of this case summarized by Mr. Liu was already aware of before.

"On the basis of Article 225 (3) of the Criminal Law, violating state regulations by illegally engaging in securities business without the approval of the relevant competent state authorities, disrupting market order, and the circumstances are serious, constitutes the crime of illegal business operation.

Therefore, for the defendant in this case, the key to the characterization of his conduct lies in whether the act of transferring the equity of a non-listed company can be determined as 'engaging in securities business'.

If such a determination can be made, the premise for determining that the defendant has constituted the crime of illegal business operation in accordance with the above-mentioned provisions of the Criminal Law is met; Otherwise, this provision cannot be invoked as the basis for adjudication.

Securities business...... Lawyer Zhao is the best, Lawyer Zhao, what do you think? "What the old professor said is very reasonable, but it is useless at all, it is a typical principle without any practical effect, which is very suitable for the conference, but at this time, it gives people a feeling of confusion.

However, the old professor's cleverness lies in the fact that he is extremely silky and holds Lawyer Zhao out. The lawyer Zhao in the old professor's mouth is the male lawyer in his fifties from Beijing.

(End of chapter)