| Summary: | 碩士 === 東吳大學 === 法律學系 === 101 === In comparison with the government’s purchasing, individual buying and corporation procurement, there are few criminal cases relating to the corporation. It is quite easy to prove that, by the key words, corporation procurement, searching for the criminal judgment cases you can get only eight cases as a result. They spread into six kinds of issues and only two regular criminals amount them. Others are not included in the Criminal Code of the Republic of China.
The so called regular criminal cases as the above are Fraudulence and Forging. Actually the details of these cases include Breach of Trust and Setting for Trail, also. It is hard to imagine that corporation procurement field includes such few criminal cases. There should be much more of the rests inside the corporation procurement. The better way to make a research of the corporation procurement crime is not by studying Judgment, but by checking the procurement procedure itself. So, by treating the procurement procedure as a spectrum, we can gather at least fourteen sneaking types inside the procedure such as, specification fixed, budge settling, separation, price settling, filtering, before dead line, extortion, fraud negotiation, inducement, obstacle, promises, order command, double requirement, and fraud collection.
Base on these fundamental types, we can apply the Criminal Code and analyze what kind of type imply criminal. In the end, the common crimes found in the procurement are Breach of Trust, Fraudulence, Forging, and Extortion. Most of the fundamental types could be seen as non- guilty. That’s the reason why we can find Setting for Trail occurs on the Judgment list. That shows the blur of laymen consciousness.
Hereby, we try to notify the staff who proceeds the procurement to avoid the risk. And the better way for them is to identify the border between the crime and nonperformance.
|
|---|
