[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, the main differences between the two lie in three aspects: the subject, identification, and punishment. Regarding the subject, the subject of corporate crime is companies, enterprises, institutions, government agencies, and organizations, while the subject of individual crime is natural persons. Regarding identification, corporate crime must be based on legal provisions, and the actions must be aimed at obtaining benefits for the unit and implemented by the unit's decision-making bodies or responsible persons. Regarding punishment, according to Articles 30 and 31 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China (implemented on October 1, 1997 and amended several times), corporate crime results in fines for the unit, and the directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible personnel are subject to criminal punishment, which is commonly referred to as the "double punishment system". Where the provisions of the specific sections or other laws stipulate otherwise, those provisions shall apply. In the case of individual crime, the individual shall bear criminal responsibility independently.

I. Problem Background and Typical Scenarios

Business leaders often confuse "company matters" with "personal matters," and employees often believe that "they don't need to take responsibility as long as they follow the company's arrangements." Typical situations include: determining whether illegal acts committed in the name of the unit constitute a corporate crime or an individual crime; identifying the individuals who will be held accountable for corporate crimes; handling cases where the unit is used to benefit individuals; determining the nature of crimes committed by individuals using the unit's name; and defining the scope of responsibility of the directly responsible personnel after the unit is punished. When handling such cases in the Beijing area, particular attention is paid to reviewing the decision-making process and the ownership of the benefits.

II. Key points of dispute

First, does the establishment of a corporate crime require an explicit provision in the specific provisions of criminal law? Second, how to determine the meaning of "seeking benefits for the unit" and "acting upon the decision of the unit"? Third, the distinction between directly responsible supervisors and other directly responsible personnel. Fourth, the determination of the act of seeking personal benefits in the name of the unit. Fifth, how to handle the unit after its dissolution or deregistration. Sixth, how to apply the fines and imprisonment penalties under the dual-punishment system.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Law Firm

Based on Henglu Lawyer's practical experience in handling criminal cases, the differences between the two can be understood from three perspectives. Firstly, the subject and basis: According to Article 30 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, only those acts that endanger society committed by companies, enterprises, institutions, organs, and organizations and are stipulated by law as corporate crimes shall bear criminal responsibility; those not stipulated as corporate crimes in the special provisions of the Criminal Law cannot be treated as corporate crimes, and only the natural persons shall be held accountable. Secondly, the intent and interests: Identifying corporate crimes usually requires that the acts reflect the corporate will and seek illegal benefits for the corporate. They must be decided by the corporate decision-making bodies or authorized and agreed upon by the responsible persons. If the acts are carried out in the name of the corporate for the benefit of individuals and the benefits accrue to individuals, they shall generally be treated as individual crimes. Thirdly, the punishment methods: According to Article 31, corporate crimes are usually subject to a double punishment system, where the corporate is fined and the directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible persons are sentenced to criminal punishment; the special provisions or other laws shall prevail where otherwise stipulated. In practice, it should be noted that the directly responsible person in charge is generally the decision-maker, organizer, and commander, while the other directly responsible persons are the specific implementers, and their degrees of responsibility may vary. If the corporate is merged or split, the criminal responsibility shall be borne by the successor corporate. When an enterprise is under investigation, it should promptly sort out the decision-making records and business processes, distinguish between corporate acts and individual acts, and avoid confusion of responsibilities.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action recommendations: Firstly, enterprises should clarify job responsibilities and approval authorities, and keep written records of decisions on major matters; Secondly, when involved in litigation, they should sort out the chain of events and distinguish between the will of the unit and individual actions; Thirdly, relevant personnel should hire lawyers as soon as possible to clarify their roles and responsibilities in the case; Fourthly, pay attention to the impact of changes in the main body of the unit on the assumption of responsibility; Fifthly, while cooperating with the investigation, they should safeguard their legitimate rights and interests in accordance with the law. For in-house services, please refer to the relevant section.Criminal defense and criminal case filing、Intellectual property protection and corporate law、Business and contract disputes in enterprises、\nFinancial capital and cross-border transactions involving foreign entities.AndSpecial servicesLegal basis: Articles 30, 31, and 67 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China (implemented on October 1, 1997 and amended several times), as well as the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2018). The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, unit crimes are subject to the express provisions of the special provisions of the Criminal Law, and not all crimes can be committed by units. Secondly, seeking benefits for the unit and acting upon the unit's decision are two key elements. Individuals who commit crimes in the name of the unit will be treated as individual criminals. Thirdly, under the dual punishment system, both the unit and the individual may be held accountable, and the division of responsibilities depends on the division of labor in decision-making and implementation. Fourthly, the merger, division, or dissolution of the unit does not automatically exempt it from criminal responsibility. Fifthly, enterprises should standardize decision-making traceability and compliance systems as soon as possible to avoid confusion between "unit behavior" and "individual behavior".

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Is committing a crime in the name of a company considered a corporate crime?

Not necessarily. It requires that the crime can be committed by the unit according to the provisions of the specific articles of the Criminal Law, and the act must reflect the will of the unit and seek benefits for the unit. If the act is carried out in the name of the unit for personal gain, and the benefits go to the individual, it will usually be treated as an individual crime. When making the determination, the decision-making process and the ownership of the benefits will be reviewed in detail.

Q2: Who will be sentenced to prison for corporate crimes?

Generally, the unit will be fined, and the directly responsible supervisors and other directly responsible persons will be held accountable. The former are mostly decision-makers, organizers, and commanders, while the latter are the actual implementers. The degree of responsibility of the two may vary, and it needs to be judged based on their specific roles and the extent of their subjective awareness.

Q3: If employees do things according to their supervisors' arrangements, do they need to take responsibility for it?

It depends on the specific circumstances. If the employee knew that the action was illegal but still participated in its implementation, they may be identified as other directly responsible persons and bear corresponding responsibilities; if they genuinely did not know about it and had no way of knowing, they may not constitute a crime. Whether the employee was aware of the situation, the degree of their involvement, and the amount of profit they gained are important factors in making a judgment. It is recommended to consult a lawyer as soon as possible.

Q4: Will the company still be held accountable if it is deregistered?

The elimination of the main body of the unit does not necessarily exempt the relevant personnel from criminal responsibility. The investigation against the directly responsible supervisors and other directly responsible personnel may still continue; if the unit is merged or split, the unit that inherits its rights and obligations may bear corresponding responsibilities. The specific handling shall depend on the circumstances of the case and the current regulations.

Q5: How is the fine for a corporate crime determined?

Generally, the law stipulates that fines shall be imposed, and the specific amount shall be determined by the court based on the nature of the crime, the circumstances, the illegal income and the economic situation of the unit, etc. Where the special provisions of the sub-sections stipulate otherwise, the provisions of the sub-sections shall prevail. Enterprises and relevant personnel may strive for lenient evaluation by returning the illicit gains and compensations, and conducting compliance rectifications, etc.

The above answer is based on the judicial practice in Beijing. The judicial interpretations in other provinces or cities may vary. For specific cases, please refer to the local rules and evidence situation.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the necessary evidence to avoid missing the statutory time limit.Criminal defense legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and open adjudication rules, and is for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. In case of disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.