[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, corporate compliance can significantly reduce criminal risks, but it cannot completely eliminate them. According to the two-tier accountability rules for unit crimes and directly responsible supervisors and other directly responsible personnel in the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, as well as the practice of compliance rectification and lenient treatment in the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, establishing and effectively operating a compliance system can define behavioral boundaries in advance, preserve evidence of duty performance during the process, and serve as a basis for liability division and lenient treatment afterwards. For enterprises that have been suspected of committing crimes, corporate compliance reforms may also bring opportunities for non-arrest, non-prosecution, or lenient treatment. It is recommended to establish a compliance checklist based on the risks of their own industry and refer to it for reference.Criminal defense and legal services for criminal case filingEvaluate the existing risks.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

The most common criminal risks that enterprises are most likely to encounter in their operations include: commercial bribery, false invoicing, contract fraud, illegal absorption of public deposits, environmental pollution, infringement of intellectual property rights, and embezzlement of duty. Typical scenarios include: business personnel being identified as bribing on behalf of the unit when privately offering rebates; purchasing false invoices to avoid taxes; platform models being ambiguous, leading to suspicions of pyramid selling or illegal fund-raising; and insufficient investment in safety production, resulting in major accidents. Many enterprises mistakenly believe that as long as the boss is unaware of it, it's not a problem, but the unit can be directly held accountable for criminal offenses. The design of relevant contracts and transaction structures can be combined with this consideration.Legal services for corporate commercial and contract disputesPre-review.

II. Key points of dispute

There are three key points in the compliance dispute. Firstly, the boundary between corporate crime and individual crime: whether it reflects the corporate will and whether the benefits belong to the corporate entity, which determines the scope of accountability. Secondly, the effectiveness of the compliance system: the difference between paper-based systems and actual operations. Whether it can prove that reasonable precautions and controls have been taken directly affects the determination of liability. Thirdly, the lenient space for post-event rectification: whether it actively discovers, reports, and remedies the problem, and whether it can strive for non-arrest, non-prosecution, or lenient sentencing. Only by clarifying the boundaries can compliance be transformed into a defense asset. For cases involving intellectual property, reference can be made to the relevant provisions.Intellectual property protection and corporate legal services.

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

Henglue Law Firm handles a large number of criminal defense cases and deeply appreciates the value of pre-compliance and post-evidence. Taking the intentional homicide criminal case with civil litigation represented by Attorney Liu Liqiang as an example: On June 16, 2024, the defendant Zhang Daqiang drove his car into the laboratory after a dispute at the mixing station, resulting in the death of Zhao Gang and injuries to Zhang Bin and Li Yuanzheng. The core disputes were the determination of intentional homicide and endangering public safety by dangerous means, and whether the defendant constituted a voluntary surrender. After a comprehensive review of the case file, Attorney Liu Liqiang focused on the subjective intent and voluntary surrender elements - Zhang Daqiang lied about brake failure after calling the police and gave contradictory statements, so he did not constitute a voluntary surrender according to law; his accelerated impact without avoiding the victim clearly showed intentional homicide. The court ultimately sentenced him to death for intentional homicide. Although this case involved an individual crime, it confirmed the decisive role of the evidence chain and subjective elements in criminal liability. In corporate cases, Henglue Law Firm also pays attention to clarifying the threshold of criminalization and the boundaries of responsibility: Attorney Shang Jiangpeng accurately pointed out that non-profit dissemination of obscene materials requires at least 40 video files to constitute a crime, but there were only three in this case, far from the standard, and eventually secured bail pending trial; Attorney Zhu Guiying identified the client's role as an accomplice in the case of operating a gambling house, and successfully changed the coercive measures due to the client's illness and low social danger. These all show that whether we can accurately identify the risk boundaries and fix the favorable circumstances directly affects the criminal consequences. This case was handled by Beijing Henglue Law Firm. 恒略律师事务所代理了大量刑事辩护案件，深刻体会到事前合规、事后有据的价值。以刘立强律师代理的故意杀人刑事附带民事诉讼案为例：2024年6月16日，被告人张大强在拌合站发生争执后驾车冲撞实验室，致赵刚死亡、张斌与李远征受伤，核心争议为故意杀人罪与以危险方法危害公共安全罪的定性、自首是否成立。刘立强律师通过全面阅卷，紧扣主观故意与自首要件——张大强报警后谎称刹车失灵、供述反复，依法不构成自首；其加速撞击且未避让，故意杀人故意明确——法院最终以故意杀人罪判处死刑。本案虽属个人犯罪，却印证了证据链条与主观要件在刑事归责中的决定作用。在涉企案件中，恒略律师同样注重厘清入罪门槛与责任边界：尚江鹏律师办理的传播淫秽物品案中，精准指出非营利性传播需达到40个视频文件方能定罪、本案仅3个远未达标，最终成功争取到取保候审；朱桂颖律师在开设赌场案中锁定当事人从犯地位、患病且社会危险性低，亦成功变更强制措施。这些都说明，能否准确识别风险边界、固定有利情节，直接关系刑事后果。本案由北京恒略律师事务所代理。Liu LiqiangThe attorney (practice certificate number: 11101200910454358, subject to the certificate issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

According to Article 30 and Article 31 (unit crime) of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, and the identification rules for directly responsible supervisors and other directly responsible personnel stipulated in relevant judicial interpretations; Article 15 (leniency for guilty plea and confession of guilt) and Article 177 (non-prosecution) of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China (amended in 2018); and with reference to the relevant guidance on compliance reform of the enterprises involved in the case. Practical suggestions: Establish compliance manuals and approval processes in different fields, keep records of training and inspections; set up a two-person review system and a reporting channel for high-risk businesses; conduct regular compliance audits; fix evidence of performing duties as soon as possible after being involved in litigation, take active remedial measures, and strive for compliance rectification. For debt collection, it can be combined with the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China.Legal services for creditor-debtor disputes and enforcement casesStandardize debt collection practices.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Compliance is not a golden ticket for exemption from liability, but it is an important basis for reducing liability and raising defenses. Enterprises should shift from firefighting after the fact to prevention in advance: clarify job responsibilities, standardize financial and contract approval procedures, and conduct compliance training for key positions and keep records. Once suspected of committing a crime, they should engage lawyers as soon as possible to distinguish between corporate and individual responsibilities, fix evidence of duty performance, and evaluate the scope of leniency for compliance rectification. If necessary, they can seek assistance from professional institutions to establish a systematic compliance management system.Special services and other case servicesDevelop a compliance plan.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If a company complies with regulations, does that mean it will definitely not be sentenced to prison?

Compliance can significantly reduce but not completely avoid criminal risks. Effective compliance can define behavioral boundaries in advance and reduce the occurrence of violations; if a lawsuit arises afterwards, complete operation records can prove that reasonable controls have been implemented, help distinguish between the unit's responsibility and individual responsibility, and strive for leniency. However, for crimes with obvious intent and serious consequences, compliance is not enough to deny responsibility. Its value lies in minimizing uncontrollable risks and providing evidence support for responsibility separation.

Q2: To establish compliance, what evidence should companies prepare and retain?

The following materials should be prepared: a written compliance manual and a list of job responsibilities; process records for business approval, contract review, and financial reimbursement; attendance and assessment materials for compliance training; internal audit and risk investigation reports; records of complaint handling and rectification; and evidence of key positions' performance. These materials can prove that the company has established and effectively implemented a compliance system during litigation, serving as an important basis for liability defense and leniency considerations.

Q3: How much does it cost to set up a compliance system or hire a criminal lawyer?

The fees for building a compliance system depend on the size of the enterprise, industry risks, and the complexity of the modules. These fees are usually negotiated and written into contracts by law firms and clients, and there is no unified standard. For criminal defense, fees are charged by stages or on a per-case basis, and contingency fees are strictly limited in criminal cases. It is recommended to first conduct special compliance in high-risk areas, and then gradually expand it, weighing the investment against possible criminal and reputational losses.

Q4: How long does it usually take for the involved enterprises to strive for leniency through compliance rectification?

The timeframes vary depending on the case and the reform process. Generally, there is a probationary period for the involved enterprises to rectify their compliance issues, which typically lasts from several months to a year and requires third-party supervision, evaluation, and acceptance. The decision not to prosecute in the review and prosecution stage is made before this period. If the case proceeds to trial, the compliance rectification situation can be used as a mitigating factor in sentencing. Overall, it often takes more than half a year from the start of the rectification to seeing the lenient results. The key is to start and implement the rectification as soon as possible, rather than going through the motions for formality's sake.

Q5: If a company wants to avoid criminal liability through compliance, what specific steps should it take?

Here are the four steps we recommend: 1. Identify high-risk areas in your industry and business operations, and prioritize those that require compliance. 2. Establish systems and processes, organize training sessions, and maintain records. 3. Implement internal reporting mechanisms and regular audits to ensure the system is effectively implemented rather than just existing on paper. 4. Immediately engage lawyers if involved in legal disputes to preserve evidence of compliance, assess individual and corporate responsibilities, and strive for lenient regulatory adjustments. Never wait until a crisis hits to take action—proactive prevention is the most cost-effective approach.

The above Q&A is mainly based on the judicial practice in the Beijing area. There may be differences in the adjudication guidelines 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·Attorney Liu Liqiang·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. If you encounter disputes, please consult a practicing lawyer in time.