If a migrant worker impersonates a foreman to fraudulently obtain RMB 1,000 and issues a receipt for RMB 1,000, does it constitute the crime of fraud? The act of inserting a metal piece similar to a coin into a vending machine in order to obtain goods actually constitutes the crime of theft, rather than the crime of fraud. The core of the crime of fraud lies in the victim voluntarily disposing of property due to deceptive conduct, thereby causing the actor to obtain illegal benefits and the victim to suffer property loss. According to Article 266 of the Criminal Law of our country, a crime is constituted only when the amount of defrauded public or private property is relatively large. A contractor absconding does not automatically constitute the crime of fraud. Only where the contractor has the intention of illegal possession and intentionally defrauds public or private property, and the amount is relatively large, can it be characterized as the crime of fraud. Arrears of project funds fall within the category of civil disputes and do not constitute a criminal offense. In this case, the act of a migrant worker impersonating a foreman to fraudulently obtain RMB 1,000 and issuing a receipt, although deceptive in nature, does not constitute the crime of fraud, because the object infringed by the crime of fraud is limited to the property of the state, the collective, or individuals, and does not include crimes infringing personal rights. Loans from financial institutions also do not fall within the object of the crime of fraud. Withdrawing money without the cardholder’s consent constitutes the crime of theft, while crimes committed by using a bank card may be suspected of constituting the crime of credit card fraud. Illegally misappropriating wage funds may constitute the crime of occupational embezzlement. The filing threshold for the crime of theft is usually RMB 1,000. It is recommended that you clearly point out to that contractor the legal risks of his conduct. If he still refuses to heed the warning, you may report him to the labor department or file a lawsuit according to law. Regarding Liu Weidong, who committed the crime of letter of credit fraud in Dalian in 1999 and is currently serving his sentence in Fushun No. 1 Prison, regarding his custody situation... According to the provisions of the Criminal Law of our country, where a criminal is sentenced to death with a two-year reprieve, after the expiration of the reprieve period, it may be decided, according to his performance in prison, whether to commute the sentence to fixed-term imprisonment. If Liu Weidong demonstrates a sincere attitude of repentance and active reform during the period of serving his sentence, he may have the opportunity to obtain a sentence reduction. In the judicial practice of our country, with regard to the custody of persons serving sentences, the relevant departments will strictly follow laws and regulations in carrying out management and supervision, so as to ensure the fair execution of punishment. For Liu Weidong, if he can demonstrate a good attitude toward reform and remarkable reform achievements, he will hopefully obtain more opportunities in the future to correct his wrongdoing and renew himself, so as to achieve the goal of reintegrating into society.
[Guozun Law Firm] Revealing the Details of Lawyer Fees for Fraud Cases in Fushun: An Overview of the Charging Standards of Professional Lawyers in Fraud Cases
Time:2026/04/22
Author:国樽律所