[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, corporate criminal risk prevention and control should cover the entire chain of "pre-compliance - in-process early warning - post-response", with key areas including anti-commercial bribery, tax and invoice-related issues, illegal fundraising and pyramid schemes, data and personal information, safety production and environmental protection, intellectual property and trade secrets, labor employment, and related transactions. According to the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China and relevant judicial interpretations, a unit-based crime is subject to a dual punishment system, punishing both the unit and the directly responsible persons and supervisors. It is recommended that enterprises establish compliance systems, implement traceability management, and conduct regular audits. When facing investigations, they should promptly engage professional criminal lawyers. For more details, please refer to the following link:Criminal defense and criminal case filing services.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

Corporate criminal risks are frequent and covert, often occurring in scenarios such as tax-related invoices, commercial bribery, illegal fundraising, infringement of citizens' personal information, environmental pollution, and safety production. Typical situations include: salespeople bribing outsiders to meet sales targets; finance departments issuing VAT invoices fraudulently to evade taxes; technical staff illegally obtaining and using user information; and managers conducting fundraising activities in the name of the company. Many business owners mistakenly believe that "there's no responsibility if they don't handle it directly" or "they can just use connections to deal with problems after they occur", which easily leads to violations of corporate crime and obstruction of justice. Proactive risk management is far better than dealing with emergencies after the fact.

II. Key points of contention

The focus of the controversy lies in three aspects. Firstly, the unit's will: whether the act is a decision made by the unit and for the unit's interests, or an individual employee exceeding his authority, directly determining whether the unit should bear responsibility. Secondly, the defense of compliance: whether the enterprise has established and implemented a system sufficient to prevent such crimes, which is the key to lenient sentencing and rectification. Thirdly, the division of responsibilities: how to draw a clear line between the unit and individual employees after the incident and safeguard the core business. Judicial authorities tend to be cautious in identifying corporate crimes, while attaching importance to the sentencing significance of corporate compliance rectification, leaving room for defense for compliant enterprises.

III. Professional analysis by Hengluo Lawyers

Take the criminal and civil lawsuit for intentional homicide handled by our firm as an example: The defendant drove a car into a laboratory, causing one death and two injuries. The victims' families entrusted our firm's lawyers to represent them in the accompanying civil lawsuit. The lawyers thoroughly reviewed the case file, refuted the defendant's arguments one by one regarding subjective intent, the establishment of voluntary surrender, and the determination of the crime, and argued that the defendant should be convicted of intentional homicide and given a heavier punishment. The court accepted the lawyers' opinion, sentenced the defendant to death for intentional homicide, and supported the request for civil compensation. This case reminds us that whether the defendant truthfully confesses after the incident and whether he compensates and reaches a settlement directly affects the sentencing level. Enterprises involved in criminal cases should also fix the facts and respond to them in accordance with the law as soon as possible. This case was handled by Beijing Hengluo Law Firm.Liu LiqiangAttorney (Practice Certificate No.: 11101200910454358, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acting on behalf of the client.

In another case of disseminating obscene materials, C was detained for criminal custody for reposting three obscene videos on a forum. He did not seek any profit and the videos were viewed about 5,000 times in total. His family entrusted the lawyers of Beijing Henglu Law Firm to intervene in the case. The lawyers defended him on two fronts: "the threshold for criminal conviction is not met" and "there is no social danger". They pointed out that non-profit dissemination requires more than 40 video files to be convicted and punished, but there were only three in this case, far from meeting the threshold. Moreover, C surrendered himself to the police and admitted his guilt and accepted the punishment. The lawyers submitted a "Legal Opinion on Bail Pending Trial", and on June 24, 2026, the Haidian Branch of the Beijing Municipal Public Security Bureau decided to grant C bail pending trial. This case shows that accurately determining the threshold for criminal conviction and grasping the policy of sparing detention and prosecution are the key to prevention and response. The case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Shang JiangpengThe attorney (practice license number: 111012023105807, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

For example, there is a case of bail application for the crime of operating a casino: W * was detained for criminal custody because he worked as a streamer on an overseas gambling platform. His family entrusted our law firm's lawyers to defend him. The lawyers seized on the key points such as his low status, being an accomplice, confessing his crime, needing medical treatment due to illness, and being a first-time or occasional offender. They built their argument around Article 67 of the Criminal Procedure Law and submitted the "Application for Bail Pending Trial". On January 19, 2026, W * was granted bail. This case reminds enterprises that they should review the status of subordinate employees and the nature of illegal income in platform-related and online businesses. They should clarify the boundaries of compliance in advance and claim mitigating circumstances such as being an accomplice in a timely manner after the fact. This case was handled by Beijing Henglu Law Firm.Zhu GuiyingThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202011246828, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The core basis includes Article 30 and Article 31 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China (unit crime and its double punishment system) and the provisions of various specific crimes, as well as the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law on bail pending trial and leniency for admitting guilt and accepting punishment. For corporate compliance, the relevant guidance opinions on third-party supervision and evaluation of corporate compliance in cases involving criminal charges can be referred to. Practical suggestions: Establish a hierarchical authorization and approval traceability mechanism, with a focus on controlling high-risk areas such as funds, invoices, data, and procurement; carry out anti-bribery, anti-money laundering, and data compliance training; establish internal reporting and self-inspection and rectification processes; when facing investigation, distinguish the responsibilities of the unit and individual employees, maintain business continuity, cooperate with the investigation in accordance with the law, and introduce criminal lawyers as soon as possible. For contract disputes, relevant provisions can be combined with the above-mentioned measures to address them in a comprehensive manner.Business and contract dispute services for enterprises.

5. Hengluo Law Firm's Reminder

Corporate criminal risks often escalate from "individual employee behavior" to "unit responsibility". The key lies in whether it can be proven that a compliance system has been established and effectively implemented, and that the relevant behaviors exceed the authority and are not condoned by the unit. It is recommended to translate compliance from a "paper-based system" to "traceable management", with regular audits and training. Once investigated, avoid concealing or destroying evidence. Instead, cooperate with the investigation in accordance with the law, distinguish responsibilities, and protect the core business and employees' legitimate rights and interests. For systematic construction, you can refer to the following guidelines:Intellectual property protection and corporate legal services.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If a company implements criminal risk prevention and control measures, can it completely avoid being held accountable for legal violations?

It's impossible to guarantee "zero risk" absolutely, but we can significantly reduce the probability and consequences of units being held accountable. The value of prevention and control lies in: on the one hand, through systems and evidence trails, proving that the relevant illegal acts are committed by individual employees exceeding their authority or without the unit's authorization or connivance, thus distinguishing "unit crimes" from "individual crimes"; on the other hand, demonstrating compliance efforts after the incident to strive for lenient treatment. According to the "double punishment system" for unit crimes in the Criminal Law, the unit and the responsible persons may be punished simultaneously, so prevention and control is about "reducing liability" rather than "exempting from liability". It is recommended to embed compliance into business processes rather than making it a formality.

Q2: What materials do enterprises need to prepare or retain for criminal risk prevention and control?

It is recommended that the system retain the following documents: the company's articles of association, the hierarchical authorization and approval system; financial records, invoices, procurement records, fund usage ledgers, and contracts; employee compliance training attendance and assessment records; special systems and self-inspection reports related to anti-bribery, anti-money laundering, and data classification; internal reporting processing and rectification records; and responsibility lists for executives and key positions. These materials are the core evidence to prove that "compliance has been established and effectively implemented" in the event of an incident. The materials should be authentic, continuous, and traceable, and avoid being fabricated retrospectively.

Q3: How much does it usually cost to set up a compliance system or hire a criminal lawyer when facing an investigation?

The construction of a daily compliance system is usually billed on a project basis or as an annual legal advisory service, with the amount depending on the company's size, industry risks, and system complexity. The law firm and the client negotiate and sign a written contract. Only in cases involving marriage and inheritance is contingency fee prohibited. Corporate compliance and criminal defense are not prohibited, but they are still subject to contractual agreements. If the case has entered the investigation stage, lawyers will need to participate in meetings and submit legal opinions, with the fees determined separately based on the workload and stage. It is recommended to first clarify the scope of services and billing methods, and to view the compliance budget as a "reduced investment" rather than a simple expense.

Q4: Once a company is investigated by the public security authorities, how long does it typically take from the initiation of the case to the issuance of the investigation results?

There are significant differences in the duration of criminal procedures. In the investigation stage, the detention of criminal suspects generally does not exceed two months, and it can be extended in complex cases; the review and prosecution stage takes about one and a half months, and the case can be withdrawn and supplemented; the first-instance ordinary procedure is concluded within two months, and the latest deadline is not more than three months. For corporate crimes, the duration is often longer due to the complexity of the accounts and the large number of personnel. If only individual employees are investigated and the company is not listed as a suspect, the impact on the business will be relatively controllable, but it still takes several weeks to several months to cooperate with the investigation and internal verification. It is recommended to fix the materials and distinguish responsibilities at the early stage of the investigation to avoid a prolonged delay in the process.

Q5: I want to implement criminal risk prevention and control in my company. What should I do specifically in the first step?

It is recommended to proceed in four steps: First, sort out the high-risk links in the industry and business (funds, invoices, data, procurement, and employment) to form a risk list; Second, establish a graded authorization, approval traceability, and regular audit system to embed compliance into the process; Third, conduct anti-bribery, data, and safety production training for executives and key positions and keep records; Fourth, prepare contingency plans for responding to emergencies - clarify the path of cooperating with investigations, preserving evidence, and distinguishing the responsibilities of the company and individual employees, and, if necessary, engage professional criminal lawyers. Throughout the process, the principle of "provable and sustainable" should be adhered to.

The above content is based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. The facts of individual cases and the jurisdiction of the court may affect the conclusions. Welcome to consult Hengluo Law Firm for specific cases.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit. →Criminal defense legal services·Attorney Liu Liqiang·Beijing Hengluo 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 you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.