[Direct answer]The criminal risks of enterprises are concentrated in five areas: finance, taxation, operations, employment, and the internet. Raising funds from the public may violate Article 176 of the Criminal Law, which stipulates the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits; falsely issuing value-added tax invoices (Article 205), commercial bribery (Article 164), and refusing to pay labor remuneration (Article 276) are all high-incidence crimes; operating beyond the scope of the internet platform may involve the crime of operating a gambling house (Article 303). According to Article 30 of the Criminal Law, a unit committing a crime shall be subject to a double punishment system: the unit shall be fined, and the directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible persons shall be sentenced to criminal punishment. It is recommended that enterprises regularly conduct criminal compliance checkups, conduct legal reviews of major decisions, and keep records of employee compliance training. Beijing Henglue Law FirmCriminal defense teamWe can provide criminal risk assessments for enterprises. For more details, please refer to the following link:Beijing Henglu Law Firm.

I. Legal basis and interpretation of provisions

1. Article 30 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 26, 2020)

For acts that endanger society committed by companies, enterprises, institutions, government agencies, and organizations, which are defined as corporate crimes by law, the legal entity shall bear criminal responsibility. There are three key elements: the act reflects the overall will of the legal entity (decided or authorized by the decision-making level), the benefits belong to the legal entity, and the specific provisions of the Criminal Law stipulate that the crime can be committed by the legal entity. The legal consequences are subject to double punishment according to Article 31: the legal entity shall be fined, and the directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible persons shall be sentenced to criminal punishment. Employees' personal acts beyond their authority are usually the responsibility of the individual, but if the act is approved by the decision-making level and the benefits belong to the legal entity, both the legal entity and the individual will be prosecuted. This is the main risk point of corporate compliance.

2. Article 303 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China (amended on December 26, 2020)

Anyone who opens a casino for profit commits the crime of operating a casino, and the statutory punishment for this crime has been increased by the Amendment (XI) to the Criminal Law. In practice, if online platforms embed gambling advertisements and recharge entry points, provide traffic promotion for gambling platforms, or serve in related positions, even if they do not participate in profit-sharing, they may still be identified as accomplices or accessories. For enterprises and practitioners who rely on platforms, live streaming, and promotion to conduct business, a criminal boundary assessment before the platform goes online is a necessity. Once the platform is involved in a crime, even marginal participants will be included in the scope of crackdown, and the cost of cutting ties after the fact will far exceed that of pre-review.

3. The practical judgment criteria

The practical grasp of judicial organs in handling cases involving enterprises: To determine the will of the unit, we need to look at the decision-making process and the ownership of interests. Keeping decision-making records and authorization documents is the key to delineating responsibilities. In financial cases involving multiple victims, ordinary employees are differentiated according to their scope of responsibilities and level of awareness. Employees who are not involved in core business and are unaware of the situation can claim that they do not constitute a crime or that the circumstances are significantly minor. For marginal roles such as live streamers and customer service staff, the determination of their illegal income must distinguish between normal labor remuneration and other forms of income. In addition, the reform of corporate compliance promoted by the Supreme People's Procuratorate stipulates that enterprises involved in cases can obtain non-prosecution or lenient sentencing recommendations if they plead guilty and accept punishment, commit to rectification, and pass the evaluation of third-party supervision. Corporate compliance rectification has become an important path to exoneration and leniency in cases involving enterprises.

II. Henglue Lawyer's Real Cases (Detailed Review)

Review of the case:At the end of 2025, W* failed in her business and faced employment difficulties, so she turned to overseas online gambling platforms. From trying her luck to getting more and more deeply involved, she joined the platform as a chat streamer to make a living by repaying gambling debts. The live streaming interface was embedded with gambling advertisements and recharge entrances. W* claimed that she only engaged in ordinary chat interactions and did not actively induce others to place bets, but she had no control over the embedded gambling functions. When the public security organ investigated the platform, it included a batch of streamers, including her, in the scope of crackdown and detained them on suspicion of operating a gambling house. Her limited compensation and the funds won from gambling on the platform were all identified as illegal and criminal proceeds. On December 20, 2025, W* was detained by the public security organ, and her family entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for her.Zhu GuiyinThe lawyer acts as the defender.

The focus of the controversy:First, regarding W's status and role in the joint crime, can he be identified as an accomplice? Second, can health factors such as illness and low social dangerousness support bail? Third, should the broadcaster's remuneration be universally identified as illegal income?

Our position and the other party's position are as follows:W's family members hope to change the compulsory measures to bail pending trial, believing that he is just a streamer with a minor role, and that he needs continuous treatment for diseases such as pituitary tumors. The investigative organ identified his streamer's income and the platform's funds as illegal criminal proceeds, which aggravated the determination of the circumstances of the case.

Attorney's Strategy and Legal Opinion:Attorney Zhu Guiyin met with W * for the first time and focused on four key points: Firstly, W * played a minor role in the joint crime, only providing traffic-driving assistance and not participating in core aspects such as profit-sharing. According to Article 27 of the Criminal Law, he should be identified as an accomplice; Secondly, after being arrested, W * always made truthful statements, admitted guilt and showed remorse, voluntarily surrendered all his illicit proceeds and paid the fine in advance; Thirdly, W * suffers from diseases such as pituitary tumor and hepatitis B that require continuous treatment, and prolonged detention would be detrimental to the control of his condition; Fourthly, W * is a first-time offender with non-violent crimes, no criminal record, and no motive to evade punishment, thus posing a low social danger. Based on Article 67 of the Criminal Procedure Law, the defense argued for bail, and W *'s family agreed to provide a guarantor or a surety bond, and W * promised to appear whenever summoned.

The court's reasoning and the outcome of the case:The case-handling organ reviewed and adopted the defense attorney's main arguments. On January 19, 2026, after being detained for 30 days, W* was granted bail pending trial according to law, temporarily leaving the detention center and regaining his freedom, laying a solid foundation for the subsequent proceedings. The case serves as a warning to enterprises: when a platform is involved in criminal activities, streamers, promoters, and other peripheral positions will also be prosecuted together. The determination of job boundaries, illegal income, and the defense of low social dangerousness are the core of the defense; pre-compliance review of online businesses is far more cost-effective than post-defense measures.

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law FirmZhu GuiyingAttorney (Practice Certificate No.: 11101202011246828, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acting as an agent.

III. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If an employee commits a personal crime, does the company bear any responsibility?

Generally, no. Corporate crimes must meet the following conditions simultaneously: the act must reflect the will of the company, benefit the company, and the law explicitly stipulates that the crime can be committed by the company. Employees' personal acts beyond their authority are usually the responsibility of the individuals involved; however, if the act is approved by the decision-making level and the benefits accrue to the company, both the company and the directly responsible individuals will be prosecuted, implementing a dual punishment system where the company is fined and the individuals are sentenced to prison. Enterprises should standardize decision-making traceability, authorization documents, and evidence of benefit attribution, so as to have a basis for disclaiming responsibility in the event of an incident.

Q2: If the company is involved in a crime, will ordinary employees be arrested?

Not all cases result in criminal charges. Judicial authorities distinguish cases according to the scope of responsibilities and the degree of knowledge: General employees who are not involved in core operations such as fundraising and who are unaware of the operating model can argue that they do not constitute a crime or that the circumstances are significantly minor. For those whose nominal positions do not match their actual responsibilities, evidence such as labor contracts, wage standards, job responsibilities descriptions, attendance and performance records, and witness statements from colleagues can be used to prove that they were actually engaged in basic tasks. If the employee truthfully confesses, cooperates with the investigation, and poses no danger to society, they may also seek to avoid being approved for arrest and be granted bail pending trial.

Q3: What are the most common criminal red lines that enterprises often violate?

In terms of funding: illegal absorption of public deposits, fund-raising fraud. Any fund-raising activities aimed at the public or promises of profit-sharing dividends must be evaluated in advance. In terms of taxation: false invoicing of VAT special invoices, tax evasion. Input and output transactions must correspond to actual transactions. In terms of operations: contract fraud, collusion in bidding, commercial bribery. In terms of employment: refusal to pay labor remuneration, refusal to enforce judgments and rulings. In terms of data and content: infringement of citizens' personal information, and content on the internet that exceeds legal boundaries. For those operating through platforms, it is also necessary to assess whether they may be considered accomplices in related crimes.

Q4: What is the purpose of the involved enterprises' compliance rectification?

The reform of corporate compliance in cases involving enterprises promoted by the Supreme People's Procuratorate stipulates that for enterprises that admit guilt and accept punishment and promise to make corrections, the third-party supervision and evaluation mechanism will review the implementation of the compliance plan. If the plan meets the requirements, the procuratorial organ may decide not to prosecute or propose lenient and mitigated sentencing according to law. Compliance and correction do not necessarily exempt the enterprise from punishment, which still depends on the specific circumstances of the case. However, it has become an important channel for leniency in cases involving enterprises. The key points of the correction are genuine reform: repairing management loopholes, establishing systems, and leaving traces of operation. On-paper compliance cannot deceive the third-party evaluation.

Q5: How should enterprises generally prevent criminal risks on a daily basis?

First, conduct regular criminal compliance checkups to screen for fundraising methods, invoice flows, business transactions, employment and data compliance. Second, subject major contracts and decisions to legal review beforehand, and assess criminal risks before launching online businesses. Third, implement decentralized management of finances and stamps to prevent payments being made through personal accounts. Fourth, document employee onboarding and annual compliance training to provide evidence supporting the claim that "the company was unaware of the situation". Fifth, consult lawyers promptly to mitigate losses when identifying potential risks, thus preventing small risks from escalating into criminal liabilities.

IV. Suggestions for Protecting Your Rights

  • The business model involves raising funds from the public, offering rebates, and distributing dividends. Before doing so, lawyers must first assess whether the activities violate the red lines of illegally absorbing public deposits and fraudulently raising funds.
  • Strictly manage invoices and funds to prevent false invoicing and surrogate invoicing. Ensure that the purchase and sales invoices correspond to actual transactions, and refrain from using personal accounts to receive and pay business funds.
  • Before the launch of platform, live-streaming, and promotion-related businesses, review the content and traffic-driving methods to prevent employees or businesses from being identified as accomplices in operating casinos or similar illegal activities.
  • The family member was investigated because the company he/she worked for was involved in a case. It is advisable to hire a lawyer as soon as possible to clarify his/her personal responsibilities and the scope of illegal income, and strive to obtain bail during the investigation stage.

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