Whether the market manager asks for money is extortion or bribery

Mondo Social Updated on 2024-02-01

In 2017, Mr. Wang served as the manager of a building materials city, responsible for the management of venue rental and electricity consumption of merchants in the building materials city. From January 2018 to December 2019, while serving as the manager of a building materials city, Wang threatened each other in the building materials city by means of power outages and non-renting of venues, and demanded RMB 20 from Gao Mouhua, a merchant in the building materials city90,000 yuan, asking for 31 yuan from the merchant Wang Moubin40,000 yuan, asking for 3 yuan from the merchant Chen Moujun050,000 yuan, asking for 100,000 yuan from the merchant Zhang, a total of 65350,000 yuan. On December 13, 2019, Wang was arrested. After the case, the public security organs seized 1 Apple mobile phone and 1 Honda car from Wang, and froze the deposit in his name of more than 200 yuan; 1 Huawei brand mobile phone was seized from Shi Mousong.

After trial, the court of first instance held that the defendant Wang, for the purpose of illegal possession, forcibly extorted money from the victim by means of coercion, and the amount was particularly huge, and his conduct constituted the crime of extortion and should be punished in accordance with law. The facts of the procuratorate's accusation that defendant Wang X committed the crime of extortion are clear, the evidence is credible and sufficient, and the charges are confirmed. First-instance verdict: Defendant Wang was guilty of extortion and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment, deprivation of political rights for 2 years, and a fine of 500,000 yuan.

After the verdict was pronounced, Wang appealed.

The court of second instance held that the appellant Wang took advantage of his position as the manager of the building materials city, responsible for the management of the building materials city's rented land, electricity and other positions, to solicit more than 60 yuan from merchants in the building materials city, which was a relatively large amount, and his behavior had constituted the crime of non-state functionaries. In the process of soliciting money from merchants, Wang adopted measures such as cutting off electricity to merchants, arbitrarily charging garbage disposal fees and land lease benefit fees, but the use of such means took advantage of Wang's management authority over matters such as leasing land, disposing of garbage, and cutting off electricity. Without these job conveniences, Wang could not carry out acts premised on the convenience of his position, such as cutting off power to merchants, arbitrarily collecting garbage disposal fees and land lease benefit fees, etc., so Wang's conduct not only meets the constitutive elements of the crime of non-state functionary, but also meets the constitutive elements of the crime of extortion. However, the two crimes are in a competition between laws and regulations, and Wang's conduct should be convicted on the basis of the crime provided for in the special law, that is, the crime of not being a state functionary, in accordance with the principle that the special law prevails over the common law. The original judgment did not find that Wang had taken advantage of his position, and that Wang's conduct was convicted of extortion, which was an error in the determination of facts and the conviction. The original judgment was incorrect in ascertaining facts and convictions, and the trial procedures were lawful, and the judgment should be changed in accordance with law. The court of second instance ruled that the first instance was revoked, and the appellant Wang was convicted of the crime of not being a state functionary, sentenced to three years in prison, and recovered 653,500 yuan of illegal gains and handed over to the state treasury.

Related Pages