1、 Problem posing

In 2015, the Ninth Amendment to the Criminal Law added the crime of bribery of influential individuals (Article 390-1 of the Criminal Law), which includes the act of delivering property to "close relatives, close contacts, and former state employees" for the purpose of seeking improper benefits, filling the loophole in the traditional bribery crime that only regulates bribery of state employees themselves. In judicial practice, bribe givers often do not have a clear understanding of the close relationship between the person they request and a government official, nor do they grasp the specific form of the relationship between the two. Instead, they only have vague perceptions such as "this person is capable of handling affairs" and "this person is familiar with the leader". How this "generalized understanding" affects the criminal composition of this crime is a difficult problem faced by both theoretical research and judicial judgment.

2、 The normative construction of bribery crimes against influential individuals

This crime is an intentional crime, and its establishment requires four elements. The subject is a general subject, and units can also be formed; Subjectively manifested as direct intent and requiringFor the purpose of seeking illegitimate benefits; The object is the non bribability of the official behavior of state personnel and the normal order of the exercise of state power; Objectively speaking, it manifests as delivering property to a specific object. Among them, the bribe takers are "close relatives of state personnel or other persons closely related to the state personnel", as well as "resigned state personnel or their close relatives and other persons closely related to them". The fundamental difference between this crime and the crime of bribery under Article 389 lies in whether the bribery subject has the identity of a state functionary.

3、 The connotation of general understanding and its significance in criminal law

Generalized cognition, also known as generalized intention, refers to the actor's overall and abstract understanding of the object, nature, or harmful consequences of the behavior, without forming a specific and definite direction. In the evaluation of criminal law, when the perpetrator realizes that they are committing a certain type of illegal act, but only has a blank understanding of the specific object or details of the act, as long as the blank does not block their understanding of illegality and will factors, their intention is established. As far as this crime is concerned, the key lies in whether the perpetrator realizes that they are facingIndividuals who have influence over state officials are used to transport property in order to influence their official behavior.

4、 The influence of general understanding on the subjective elements of this crime

This crime subjectively requires the perpetrator to know that the other party isInfluential individuals "with the intention of seeking illegitimate benefits through this. Judicial practice has shown that bribe givers usually do not have precise knowledge of the names, positions, and kinship details between the other party and specific state officials, but only judge based on life experience that the other party is a "leader's relative", "a person around the leader", or "someone who can speak up". In this case, as long as the perpetrator has a general understanding of "influencing official affairs through influential channels", it is sufficient to meet the subjective attribution requirements of this crime. On the contrary, if the perpetrator mistakenly believes that the other party is a state official, they should be charged with bribery instead of this crime; If the perpetrator does not believe that the other party has any influence, then there is a lack of intent for this crime.

5、 The extension of summarizing the recognition of objective elements

The general understanding also radiates to the proof of objective elements. Judicial determinationWhen it comes to "influential individuals," there is no need for the briber to identify specific state officials. Instead, based on common sense, combined with evidence such as the background of communication between the two parties, the method of interest transmission, and the implementation path of the entrusted matters, it can be inferred that the briber has a general understanding of the "channels of influence. This reduces the burden of proof for the details of the perpetrator by the prosecution, making this crime more effective in combating "curve bribery" behavior. However, caution should be exercised: a general understanding cannot replace the substantive verification of the "influential" identity of the bribe taker, otherwise there may be a risk of objective attribution.

6、 Boundary clarification in judicial application

Firstly, a general understanding should be based onThe lower limit is' recognizing the existence of influential channels', and delivering property purely due to deception does not constitute intent in this crime. Secondly, a general understanding does not exclude the possibility of the perpetrator having specific knowledge and breaking away from the first instance; If the perpetrator points to a specific state official at the same time, there may be a competition between the crime of bribery and this crime. Thirdly, in unit crimes, the directly responsible supervisors and other directly responsible personnel only need to have a general understanding and do not need to master the details of their relationships.

7、 Conclusion

As a flexible mechanism for subjective attribution, a general understanding enables precise responses to bribery crimes against influential individualsThe governance needs of 'hunting people around' should be met to avoid inappropriate limitations on the scope of punishment. But its application must be based on substantive verification of the identity of "influence" to prevent generalization. Only by maintaining a balance between subjective cognition and objective identity can the legislative value of punishing crimes and safeguarding human rights be achieved.