This document is based on article 266 of the criminal law of the people's republic of china and on the interpretation of the supreme people's court and the supreme people's procuratorate on the specific application of the law in criminal cases of fraud (law interpretation) no. 7), as well as an updated version of judicial practice in 2026, which is authentic and accessible only for general legal purposes, do not constitute a basis for the proceedings。
In life, anyone can be deceived by the fact that someone is paid back, some people are loaned for “helping out” and lost their connection, and others are being targeted by impostors who pretend to be customers. The first reaction of many is “no, no money, no luck”, or “no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money, no money。
In fact, fraud cases are never so simple as “values only”. In judicial practice in 2026, even if the amount defrauded did not reach the threshold of $3,000, the police would still be able to file a case, provided that the four statutory conditions were met; on the other hand, if the amount was high, it would have to follow the legal path of civil disputes and would not have been able to intervene。
Today, we tear down these four core conditions, with specific criteria for judgement, evidentiary techniques and reporting techniques, to help you fully distinguish between “fraud” and “civil disputes” and to stop being overwhelmed and secure in your legitimate interests in the face of deception。
I. Breaking down two major areas of error: do not let the “value theory” delay the defence of rights
Many people have two major areas of misperception of fraud, which directly leads to the failure of the defense of rights
Mistake 1: less than $3,000. I'm sure it won't stand. Case
This is the most common area of error. According to the “two-high” judicial interpretation, between $3,000 and $10,000 is a national reference range of “larger amounts”, a reference threshold for criminal cases, not an absolute criterion。
• there is a national uniform threshold for telecommunication network fraud: in 2026, the 3,000 dollar filing standard was still in force, a special provision for online fraud
• geographical differences in common frauds: most provinces are implemented at $3,000, while developed provinces such as beijing and shanghai are increased to $5,000, but comply with the national minimum standard of $3,000
• the key is “priority of circumstances”: if fraud is committed against the elderly, persons with disabilities or against an unspecified majority, the police must also file a case, even if the amount is less than $3,000。
Mistake 2: big enough to be a fraud
The amount is only a “reference item”, not a “decision item”. To give a real example, a boss borrowed $500,000 from his friends for “a lack of working capital” and committed to repay and pay high interest after six months. After borrowing, however, the owner did use the funds to run the company, only to incur losses due to poor market conditions, and later actively communicated repayment plans without losing links and squandering funds. This situation, even if it amounted to $500,000, was a civil borrowing dispute, and the police were unable to file a case of fraud, because core conditions were not met。
Ii. Core 4 conditions: one cannot be fulfilled! Case
According to article 266 of the criminal code and the current judicial interpretation, the conviction of the offence of fraud must satisfy four statutory conditions at the same time, and none of them can be prosecuted for fraud. These four layers of conditions are progressive and constitute a complete logical chain of judgement for fraud, which we break down one by one, which we speak in plain language, so that you can quickly contrast。
Condition 1: subjectively “illegal possession” - the core boundary between fraud and civil disputes line
This is the most critical of the four conditions and the easiest to ignore. What is “illegal occupation purpose”? To put it simply, the perpetrator did not intend to pay back the money from the outset, did not intend to perform, wanted to take away your money or property and had no will or ability to return it。
How to judge whether there is a subjective purpose of illegal occupation? It is not possible to hear what the perpetrator “speaks” in the light of objective behaviour, which is essentially the five points considered in judicial practice, provided that they represent more than two points and that they are generally recognized as having an illegal occupation:
1. Loss of connection and runaway: immediately after the loan or transfer of funds, the mobile phone number is changed, you are taken away from the residence and no one is found
2. Funds are used for luxury, gambling, illegal activities: when money is obtained, it is not intended for promised use, it is used to buy luxury goods, gambling, repayment of personal loans, etc.
(c) the fraudulent use of funds for reasons such as “buying a house” and “investment in high-return projects” where there is no ability to pay
4. Failure to fulfil any commitments upon receipt: promises to deliver goods, to pay benefits, to deliver at all and to communicate voluntarily
5. Fake key identities, qualifications and cover-up of facts: e. G. Impersonating state employees, bank executives, doctors, forgery of contracts, documents to convince you that they are capable of performing。
Inverse judgement: what is not the purpose of illegal occupation? For example, temporary working capital, active repayment later; non-payment on time for objective reasons (e. G. Outbreak, business losses), but active communication, negotiation of repayment plans, unconnected, volatile funds - this situation, even in the event of a dispute, is a civil dispute and does not constitute fraud。
Condition 2: deceptive acts of “fiction of facts, concealment of the truth” are objectively committed
It's the basis of fraud. Without deception, no amount of money could constitute fraud. The so-called “fiction of facts, concealment of the truth” means that the perpetrators fabricate the facts that do not exist, or conceal the crucial truth, so that you can create a false perception that leads to the active disposal of property。
There are three common types of fraud, covering the vast majority of fraud scenes:
1. Fiction of identity, qualifications: e. G. Impersonating a police officer, a judge, a customer's uniform, a star, falsification of work permits, contracts, authorizations
(b) fiction projects, returns: e. G. Recovery of “low-input high-return”, “stable-for-profit” investments, “low-cost good” purchases, falsification of profit records, logistics information
3. Concealing key truths: such core facts as lack of repayment capacity, lack of performance qualifications, quality of goods。
Distinction: the distinction between civil fraud and fraud - – civil fraud is an “exaggeration” of the fact that, for example, the merchants say that “goods sell first” (the actual sales are first, but not first), while fraud is a “total fiction” of the fact that, for example, there is no commodity at all, but that there is a false claim that the goods are fraudulent。
Condition 3: the victim took the initiative to dispose of property because of a misperception
This is the key to causality. To put it simply: your deception has a direct causal link to the deceptiveness of the perpetrator - it is because you believe the lies of the other party that you transfer, pay and deliver。
A fraud does not constitute fraud even if the other party is defrauded:
1. You have voluntarily given money knowing that the other party is lying: for example, knowing that the other party is a liar is simply a "help" transfer out of a "sympathetic" mentality
You incur losses as a result of your own miscalculation, risk self-attribution: for example, by investing in shares of your own, due to market losses, or by believing in the other party's “high return” commitment but willing to participate, knowing the risks — a civil risk dispute, not fraud。
By way of example, one of the people who saw the "book-the-blow" commercial online said, "book $100 to $120" and you did get $120 after you did it; then you said, "book back $15,000" and you believed it, you turned $10,000, and the other went missing. In this case, it is because you believe in the other party's “return” lie that you transfer the money, which is a cause-and-effect condition。
Condition 4: “larger” direct loss of property
This is the point of reference for the establishment of a criminal case, but only if the first three conditions are met. In accordance with the provisions in force:
• national general reference range: between $3,000 and more than $10,000 is “larger” and the provinces can adjust to their economic level, not less than $3,000
• special standards for telecommunication network fraud: a single 3,000-dollar national case, even if only 3,000-dollar fraud
• precedence of special circumstances: fraud of older persons, persons with disabilities, relief payments, or telecommunications fraud against a non-specified majority, even if the amount is less than $3,000。
Critical reminder: “larger amount” here refers to direct, actual property losses, excluding indirect losses. For example, you're being cheated for $3,000, which is a direct loss; the interest that you cannot repay your mortgage on time as a result of the fraud is an indirect loss, not counting the amount of the case。
Iii. The latest exercise in 2026: how do different scenes judge? Case with truth
In order to give you a more intuitive picture, we are helping you to quickly distinguish between “can and” and “can not” in the light of the common fraud scene of 2026:
Scene 1: can a fraud be established when someone knows doesn't pay
This is the most common dispute, and many are struggling with the question of whether it is fraud or not to borrow money from an acquaintance. Against four conditions:
• the fulfilment of condition 1 (unlawful occupation purpose): if the loan is based on a false justification (e. G. Falsely claiming that the mother is ill in hospital), the receipt of the money is lost, the money is wasted and no active communication is made with the repayment - a case can be established
• unsatisfied condition 1: if there is a real use for borrowing, it is only late and difficult to repay and actively negotiate — it is impossible to open a case and only through civil borrowing proceedings。
The real case: neighbor zhang chiu's school fees are missing i borrowed $20,000 from you for a month. But you found out that zhang had no children at school, and then you got paid to gamble, and you were hacked. In this case, all four conditions were met and a case could be filed for fraud。
Scene 2: can a case be opened
In 2026, fraud was still high against four conditions:
• condition 1: disconnected, runaway and satisfied upon receipt of funds
• condition 2: fiction of a “low input high return” fact, met
• condition 3: active transfer of funds on the basis of belief in a lie of return
• condition 4: a telecommunication network fraud of $3,000 can be established, even if it is only $3,000。
Note: even if you've only been tricked for $1,000, the police will follow the law and order case, while pursuing the fraudster and recovering your losses。
Scene 3: can a case be filed for fraud by impostor law
This fraud is directed against an unspecified majority against four conditions:
• condition 1: the purpose of illegal occupation is met
• condition 2: fiction of the identity of the public prosecutor's act, forgery of legal instruments and satisfaction
• condition 3. Active transfers for fear of “suspicious offences”, met
• condition 4: telecommunications network fraud, $3,000 filed, met。
A key reminder: the public prosecutor's act does not allow you to transfer money by telephone, by twitter or by downloading the “safe account” app, in this case, simply suspending the telephone and calling 110 for verification。
Scene 4: can a fraud be established by buying fake goods online
Against four conditions:
• condition 1: if the merchant does not have any good at all, it merely forges a certificate of entry and sells counterfeit goods for money — satisfying
• condition 2: fiction of “good” facts met
• condition 3: purchase for belief in a “good” lie
• condition 4: civil disputes or security cases may be dealt with if the amount amounts to $3,000 and is satisfied。
N. B.: if the merchants have a source of good goods, it is misdelivery, quality is problematic, it is a civil default and does not constitute fraud。
Iv. How do you defend a fun? Three steps towards efficient recovery of losses
We know four conditions for the filing of a case. The key is how to operate when they are deceived. We summarized the three core steps, which were free of charge for the entire journey, and followed the steps:
First step: establish the evidence immediately — the basis for the defence of rights
The evidence is the key to the case and, without it, the police are unable to do so. After being deceived, the following evidence is collected at the first time and is not deleted:
1. Chat records: chat records on platforms such as twitter, qqq, sms, whisper, including identification information, promises, transfer requirements
2. Transfer vouchers: bank transfer records, micro-trust/payment stopgaps, complete transfer order numbers, recipient information
3. Sound recordings of calls: if there is a call, remember to keep the recordings, especially the fraudulent content of the other party
4. Evidence of false information: forged contracts, documents, photographs, videos and information about false items
5. Information on the identity of the other party: the name of the other party, the cell phone number, the micro-sign, the bank card number, the address, etc., the better。
Skills: do not delete any information, do not modify chat records, maintain original status and, if necessary, notarize。
Step 2: selecting the right channels for reporting — precise rights
Based on the scene of fraud, it is more efficient to select the corresponding reporting channels:
On-line fraud (stamping, impostoring, censorship, cyberloathing, etc.): directly dialing 110 or reporting to the nearest police station, which can also be reported on the “national anti-fraud centre” app
2. Under-line fraud (lending of money by an acquaintance, off-line transactions, real-employer fraud, etc.): reporting to the police station where the fraud was committed or where the other party was domiciled
3. Cyber-purchase fraud: first contact the platform's client service to file a complaint requesting the freezing of each other's accounts and recovery of funds; if the platform is unable to handle them, report them to the police station。
Reference to reporting (simplified and clear of key information):
“police comrade, i want to report. On x-x, 2026, i contacted each other by micro-mail (cell phone number), and asked me to transfer $ xx on the grounds that it was worth the money, and when i transferred the money by xx, the other party was $ xx (if it was lost, if it did not fulfil the promise). I have evidence such as chat records, money transfer vouchers, suspicion of fraud, and request to open an investigation.”
Step 3: cooperate with police investigations and actively defend rights
When a report is filed, do not wait for the results and cooperate actively with the police:
1. Provide complete evidence and cooperate with the police in making a statement that it was deceiving
2. To follow the progress of the case and to supplement in a timely manner the additional evidence required by the police
3. If, in the opinion of the police, it does not constitute fraud, a notice of inadmissibility is required, which may then be reviewed by a higher public security organ or brought before a court for criminal prosecution。
V. Guidelines for placing those throughs: don't do it to leave defence
Many have failed to defend their rights, not because the conditions were not met, but because they did so, resulting in the loss of evidence and the denial of their rights:
1. Do not consult in private, and lose key evidence: do not consult privately with the other party on repayments after having been deceived, and once the other party negotiates, the other party may turn back and say that this is a civil dispute, while you lose key chat records, transfer vouchers
2. Without delay, timely reporting of fraud cases: the longer the fraud cases are time-barred, the more likely the counterparty is to transfer funds and destroy evidence, and the more likely it will be to recover damages in 2026, within 72 hours of fraud
Don't believe the “designate's payback” liar: after being deceived, someone would pretend to be a “police” “passenger” and say, “can help you recover the damage” and make you transfer the money and pay for it. It's a new fraud. Don't believe it. Official defence is free of charge。
It's written at the end: it's not scary to be deceived, it's terrible not to understand the law
There are many ways in life of fraud, but no matter how it changes, the four core filing conditions do not change. Bearing in mind these four conditions, the loss can be recovered to the greatest extent possible by taking the initiative to defend the legal weapon, instead of “bad luck” in cases of deception。
At the same time, we are reminded of the need to learn more about the law, to raise awareness about fraud, not to be cheap, not to believe in “high return” promises, not to transfer money to strangers at will, and to reduce the risk of fraud from the source。
Topical discussion
Have you ever been cheated? What did you do? Which of these four conditions, do you think, are most easily ignored? Welcome to the comment area to share your experiences and ideas, share fraud prevention techniques, and guard your money bag。
Watchtips
