[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, the application conditions of the compliance-based non-prosecution system can be summarized into three aspects: subject, entity, and procedure. On the subject level, it applies to enterprises suspected of corporate crimes, especially companies with independent legal person status, which usually require the enterprise to have an independent subject status and a relatively complete governance structure. On the entity level, it typically considers factors such as: the amount of money involved in the case is relatively small or the harm caused is relatively light; the enterprise truthfully confesses, actively returns the illicit proceeds and compensates for the losses; the suspected acts are caused by individual employees violating operating procedures rather than systematic arrangements by the enterprise's decision-making level; and the enterprise involved in the case has formulated and effectively implemented compliance systems for relevant business processes. On the procedural level, the procuratorial organs usually initiate a compliance review period, set review time limits and compliance commitment requirements, and focus on verifying the implementation of the system and the effectiveness of rectification during the review period. After the expiration of the review period, a comprehensive evaluation is made to decide whether to issue a non-prosecution decision. The application of this system shall be subject to the current effective laws and regulations and judicial rulings, and may be referred to for reference.Criminal defense and criminal case filingThe instructions in the column.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

Most of those who consult on this issue are enterprise executives, legal counsel, or operators who have received relevant notifications. Common scenarios include: an enterprise being suspected of corporate crime during its operations and wanting to understand whether it can avoid prosecution through rectification; having been investigated and wanting to know whether compliance rectification can play a role; or hearing about precedents where enterprises have achieved non-prosecution through compliance and wanting to understand what level of compliance is required. In practice, a common misunderstanding is that non-prosecution through compliance is understood as paying money to obtain a non-prosecution conclusion. In fact, it is a factual evaluation of the enterprise's rectification situation by the procuratorial organ, with the core focus being whether the enterprise has truly changed the management mechanisms that led to the occurrence of the crime. If there is no substantive rectification and only a compliance manual is submitted, it is difficult to meet the requirements of system application.

II. Key points of contention

The focus of the first point is the eligibility of the main body, and the impact of the enterprise form and the actual controller on the determination. The focus of the second point is the measurement standard of the involved amount and the harm consequences. The focus of the third point is the judgment of the correlation between the nature of the illegal act and the responsibility of the decision-making layer. The focus of the fourth point is whether the compliance system covers the involved business links and has been actually implemented. The focus of the fifth point is the completion and supporting evidence of the return of illicit gains and compensation for losses. The focus of the sixth point is the determination standards for truthful confession and cooperation with the investigation. The focus of the seventh point is the fulfillment of obligations and communication records during the compliance review period. The focus of the eighth point is the uncertainty of the review results and the obligation to inform of risks. For the procedural details of the exploration period, please refer to the relevant documents.Special services and other casesThe instructions in the column.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

From the practical perspective of criminal defense and compliance services, what typically determines whether a compliance-based non-prosecution agreement can be achieved is not how many documents the company submits, but whether three levels of proof can be established. The first level is the factual layer: whether the involved actions constitute individual violations or have the systematic support of the company's decision-making level. If the latter is the case, the room for rectification is extremely limited. The second level is the rectification layer: whether the company has identified the real risk points of the involved business links, revised the system and implemented it effectively, and provided continuous implementation records during the probation period. The third level is the result layer: whether the return of illicit gains and compensation for losses have been completed, whether the suspect has made a truthful statement, and whether he has cooperated with the investigation. Lawyers' work in practice often revolves around these three points: preliminary risk screening and rectification plan design, mid-term communication and material preparation, and continuous record maintenance during the probation period. Among them, the execution details of the third level are most easily overlooked, such as whether the compensation funds have actually arrived, whether the victims have issued certificates of understanding, and whether similar violations have occurred again subsequently. All of these will directly affect the evaluation conclusion.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action recommendations: 1. Confirm the suspected subject and charges as soon as possible and evaluate the subject's eligibility. 2. Initiate asset recovery and compensation for losses as well as loss mitigation efforts immediately and retain relevant evidence. 3. Conduct a comprehensive investigation of the business processes involved in the case, compile a list of issues and formulate rectification plans. 4. Revise and immediately implement systems for high-risk processes, establishing a traceability mechanism. 5. Provide truthful statements and actively cooperate with the investigation without concealing any facts. 6. Proactively explain the rectification arrangements to the investigating authorities and maintain communication records. 7. Avoid similar violations during the probation period to prevent all previous efforts from being undermined. 8. When necessary, engage professional lawyers to provide full support throughout the process. Legal basis: Articles 30 and 31 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China regarding the subject of corporate crime; Article 153 (effective January 1, 2021) of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China; The specific application of corporate crime and compliance probation shall be governed by the current effective laws, regulations, and judicial rulings.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, the decision of non-prosecution due to compliance is an uncertain outcome with no inevitability. The procuratorial organ needs to make a judgment based on the overall situation. Secondly, the key to rectification lies in covering the real risk points in the involved links. General system amendments are hard to convince the evaluation. Thirdly, the work of refunding should be started as soon as possible and actually completed. There is a big difference between verbal promises and documentary evidence. Fourthly, making a truthful statement is an important manifestation of cooperation. Hiding or repeating may lead to more unfavorable consequences. Fifthly, the recurrence of similar violations during the probation period is the most common reason for interruption. Supervision mechanisms should be set up in advance. Sixthly, enterprises should do a good job of risk notification, let the decision-making layer understand the uncertainty of the application of the system, and avoid being held accountable afterwards. Seventhly, the responsibilities of the individuals and enterprises involved need to be evaluated separately. The handling of the individuals' situation should not be relaxed just because the enterprise has entered the probation period.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Under what circumstances can a company seek a compliance-based non-prosecution agreement?

Generally, several conditions are required: the amount involved in the case is relatively small or the harm caused is relatively minor; it is caused by individual personnel violating operating procedures rather than a systematic arrangement by decision-makers; truthfully confessing and actively returning the illegal proceeds and compensating for the losses; having established and effectively implemented compliance systems for the business processes involved in the case; and being able to cooperate with the inspection work of the procuratorial organs. Specifically, the applicable laws and regulations and judicial judgments shall prevail. Cases vary greatly, so it is recommended to evaluate the possibility after understanding the specific charges and amounts involved.

Q2: Can you buy compliance and non-prosecution with money?

No. Compliance-based non-prosecution is an evaluation of the enterprise's rectification by the procuratorial organ, which is based on the facts, the rectification and cooperation, rather than the cost expenditure. The procuratorial organ will verify whether the system covers the involved links, whether it has been actually implemented, and whether there are any problems occurring again during the probation period. It's hard to meet the applicable requirements if there is only a compliance manual but no implementation records. Any high-priced service that comes at the expense of the promised results should be treated with caution.

Q3: How long is the compliance review period typically?

The duration of the inspection is determined by the procuratorial organ based on the circumstances of the case, and usually includes a clear start and end time, the content of the inspection, and reporting requirements. During this period, the enterprise needs to submit a compliance operation report as required, cooperate with spot checks and verifications, and accept regular communication. After the inspection period expires, the procuratorial organ will conduct a comprehensive evaluation and make a decision. The duration of the inspection varies from case to case. It is recommended to formulate a detailed internal implementation plan after the procuratorial organ clarifies it, so as to avoid affecting the evaluation due to omitted reporting matters.

Q4: What should I do if I'm held accountable together with my company?

This needs to be evaluated separately. The directly responsible supervisors and other directly responsible personnel in the unit's crime shall bear corresponding responsibilities. Personal responsibility and the unit's compliance review are two parallel paths. The fact that the enterprise enters the review does not mean that personal responsibility is automatically exempted. Conversely, even if the personal responsibility is relatively light, it does not affect the enterprise's rectification. In practice, it is recommended that the same team handle it comprehensively to ensure that the rectification materials at the enterprise level and the defense logic at the individual level are consistent, and to avoid contradictory statements. The specific arrangements for property recovery and compensation can be referred to for reference.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcementThe implementation path of the column.

Q5: What should I pay attention to during the inspection?

There are three key points: First, to prevent similar violations, even minor over-authority operations may affect the evaluation; Second, to fulfill the obligations of reporting and cooperation in a truthful and timely manner; Third, to keep all execution records, including approval documents, meeting minutes, training attendance records, and assessment results. In practice, it is recommended to appoint a dedicated person to be responsible for the coordination and establish an internal reminder mechanism. The organization of relevant materials can be referred to for reference.Intellectual property protection and corporate lawThe description of the column.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. There may be differences in the adjudication opinions in different regions. It is recommended to consult a professional lawyer based on the specific circumstances of the case.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Criminal defense legal services·Beijing Henglue 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. If a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.