Is it enough for the borrower to illegally occupy the property in his name but refuses to repay the

If the borrower has property in his name but refuses to repay the loan to illegally occupy it, it should be illegally embezzled, and he can use legal means to protect his legitimate rights and interests.

If the borrower has property in his name but refuses to repay the loan, it cannot constitute illegal embezzlement, and the money in the name of the borrower belongs to the private property of the individual before it is enforced, and cannot constitute illegal embezzlement.

Refusal to repay is not illegal possession, and he can be sued for refusal to repay and then apply for compulsory enforcement.

Now you have property in your name, but you refuse to repay the loan, this situation is not illegal occupation, but fraud, you can go to the court to sue for urgent execution.

If the borrower has property in his name and refuses to repay the loan, you can go to court to sue and believe that he has to pay you back before the law.

Does the borrower have property in his name, but refuses to repay the loan? Illegal embezzlement, some people have money but don't pay it back, such people have to use the law to prosecute, but you must have evidence, evidence of borrowing money.

Does the refusal of the borrower to have property in his name constitute illegal misappropriation? This is not allowed, it is against the law, you can sue him, he has the right to pay the debt you owe you.

If he has property, but has not yet repaid the debt, you can sue him, and the court will make a fair judgment.

The property ambassador who lent money to someone else refused to repay the loan. If such a thing happens, it can be dealt with by the police, because everyone must protect their legitimate rights and interests.

The borrower has property in his name, but refuses to repay, as long as you have the other party's IOU, the IOU indicates the date of repayment, you can take the borrower to court, use the law to protect their rights, if the other party still does not repay, you can also apply to the court for enforcement.

Have you had property in your name before, but you refuse to repay it? Illegal embezzlement of this borrower, he does not constitute illegal embezzlement, but if the borrowed money is not repaid, you can sue him, sue the court, and then use his property to mortgage your debt.

Refusal to repay and illegal infringement are two different things, refusal to repay is only a matter of debt, and embezzlement is the embezzlement of other people's property.

Borrow directly, sue through the court to request enforcement, and if you don't enforce it, you will be included in the list of old men.

Of course not, in the case of someone else's participation brand, of course, does not constitute a major professional lawyer to change it for you.

I don't think this is a problem of illegal encroachment, this is a problem of the old lai, you should go to the court to sue, then the court will sue, and it is possible to repay the money, otherwise it will be impossible in this life.

It does not constitute illegal encroachment, if it is said that he has a borrowing and lending relationship because of him, he can only say that he is a liar.

This shouldn't be counted, because after all, it's someone else's own property.

This crime is generally impossible to establish, if he does not pay back, you can go to the court to sue, and the court will enforce it.

You can apply to the court for enforcement, and if he has property, he can apply for enforcement.

If the borrower does not repay the money, it is illegal possession, and he can take the IOU and appeal to the court and ask for help from the clean house.

This does not constitute embezzlement, you have a loan relationship, this is a civil case.

If the borrower has property in his name but refuses to repay the money, then you can go to the court to sue and ask him to return your money, and if he does not repay the money, you can ask the court to enforce against him and directly freeze his property and deduct it from his bank card.

If the borrower has property in his name but refuses to repay the loan, this kind of old behavior will be sanctioned, and you can go to court to sue him.

Judging from your description, the borrower has property in his name but refuses to repay the loan, in this case, he should pass the law, let the law protect his interests, and he can sell the property in his name to repay his economic losses.

Although this is not illegal encroachment, it is morally wrong.

Like this, if he has property in his name, but repays the full amount of the debt, the court will include this kind of person in the list of old men, and he will not pay back the money he owes.

If he refuses to repay the property in the name of the borrower, he must also sue in court to force him to change the money, which is the best legal channel.

If the borrower fails to repay the loan for a long time due to some reason, or fabricates lies or conceals the truth to defraud the money and property, and cannot repay it when due, as long as there is no celebration of illegal possession, and there is no squandering of the debt, no more deception and deception, and the borrower really intends to repay; There are also some people who forge repayment receipts after making IOUs, and fraudulently claim that they have repaid the loans, which is still a loan dispute and does not constitute fraud. Failure to repay borrowed money cannot constitute the crime of embezzlement. For the object of this sin is "the property, forgotten or buried object of another person who has been entrusted to his own safekeeping".

Borrowing money does not also need to be seen whether the perpetrator has the purpose of illegal possession, using deceptive methods such as fabricating facts or concealing the truth, so that the victim falls into a misunderstanding and "voluntarily" hands over the property, and defrauds a relatively large amount of public or private property. Under normal circumstances, disputes arising from the borrower's failure to repay the loan on time are private lending disputes, which are a civil legal relationship and should be regulated by civil law and do not give rise to criminal liability. 1. Subject matter requirements.

The object of this crime is the ownership of the property of others. The object of this crime is the property, forgotten and buried objects of others that have been entrusted to one's safekeeping. 2. Objective elements.

This crime is objectively manifested in the act of illegally taking possession of other people's property, forgotten items, or buried items that they have entrusted to them for safekeeping, and the amount is relatively large, and refusing to return them. 3. Main body requirements. The subject of this crime is a general subject, and any natural person who has reached the age of 16 and has the capacity for criminal responsibility can constitute this crime.

4. Subjective elements. The offence must be subjectively motivated by intent, i.e., unlawful possession of property, forgotten or buried property that is known to belong to another person for his safekeeping. (1) The claimant shall be the person in possession, and a non-possessor may not exercise the right to claim the return of possession even if he has a lawful source of right to the possession.

2) The possession must be usurped. Misappropriation refers to the exclusion of the possessor's de facto control over the thing not based on the will of the possessor. (3) The counterpart shall be the predator.

4) The right to request the return of possession can only be exercised if the possession still exists and can be returned. According to Article 460 of the Civil Code, if the immovable or movable property is in possession of the person in possession, the right holder may request the return of the original property and its fruits; However, the necessary expenses incurred by the bona fide possessor in connection with the maintenance of the immovable or movable property shall be paid.

Possession of property by non-concealed excavation may constitute the crime of assault on property or embezzlement of public office if the circumstances are serious.

The crime of assaulting property refers to the criminal act of seizing public or private property for the purpose of illegal possession, or intentionally destroying public or private property.

The crime of embezzlement in public office refers to the conduct of personnel of a company, enterprise, or other unit who, in violation of the provisions of law, take advantage of their position to illegally take possession of the property of their own unit.

1. What is the legal provision for unlawful possession of property?

Article 270 of the Criminal Law [Crime of Embezzlement] Whoever illegally takes possession of another person's property in custody as his own, and the amount is relatively large, and refuses to return it, is to be sentenced to up to two years imprisonment, short-term detention or a fine; where the amount is huge or there are other serious circumstances, a sentence of between two and five years imprisonment and a concurrent fine is to be given.

Where the forgotten or buried items of others are illegally taken into their own possession, and the amount is relatively large, and they refuse to hand it over, punishment is to be given in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

This crime is only lenient for those who tell it.

Article 271 of the Criminal Law [Crime of Embezzlement in Public Office] Employees of companies, enterprises, or other units who take advantage of their positions to illegally take possession of the unit's property for themselves, and the amount is relatively large, are to be sentenced to up to three years imprisonment or short-term detention and a concurrent fine; where the amount involved is huge, a sentence of between three and ten years imprisonment and a concurrent fine is to be given; where the amount is especially huge, the sentence is 10 or more years imprisonment or indefinite imprisonment and a concurrent fine.

Where personnel engaged in public affairs in state-owned companies, enterprises, or other state-owned units, or personnel appointed by state-owned companies, enterprises, or other state-owned units to engage in public affairs in non-state-owned companies, enterprises, or other units, have the conduct described in the preceding paragraph, they are to be convicted and punished in accordance with the provisions of articles 382 and 383 of this Law.

2. What is the sentencing standard for illegal possession of property?

Article 270 of the Criminal Law [Crime of Embezzlement] Whoever illegally takes possession of another person's property in custody as his own, and the amount is relatively large, and refuses to return it, is to be sentenced to up to two years imprisonment, short-term detention or a fine; where the amount is huge or there are other serious circumstances, a sentence of between two and five years imprisonment and a concurrent fine is to be given.

Where the forgotten or buried items of others are illegally taken into their own possession, and the amount is relatively large, and they refuse to hand it over, punishment is to be given in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

This crime shall be dealt with only if it is told.

Article 271 of the Criminal Law [Crime of Embezzlement in Public Office] Employees of companies, enterprises, or other units who take advantage of their positions to illegally take possession of the unit's property, and the amount is relatively large, are to be sentenced to up to three years imprisonment or short-term detention and a concurrent fine; where the amount involved is huge, a sentence of between three and ten years imprisonment and a concurrent fine is to be given; where the amount is especially huge, the sentence is 10 or more years imprisonment or indefinite imprisonment and a concurrent fine.

Where personnel engaged in public affairs in state-owned companies, enterprises, or other state-owned units, or personnel appointed by state-owned companies, enterprises, or other state-owned units to engage in public affairs in non-state-owned companies, enterprises, or other units, have the conduct described in the preceding paragraph, they are to be convicted and punished in accordance with the provisions of articles 382 and 383 of this Law.

Borrowing money is only a debt dispute, which can be recovered by going to court to apply for a payment order or suing for recovery.

The crime of embezzlement refers to the act of illegally taking possession of another person's property, forgotten property, or buried property for one's own custody for the purpose of illegal possession, and refusing to return it to the owner of a relatively large amount.

1. The difference between quasi-property rights and property rights.

A quasi-property right act refers to a legal act with the direct purpose of changing other property rights other than property rights. Assignment of creditor's rights, bonds, and forgiveness of debts. Although the act does not have the effect of the property right relationship, the act can directly cause the same effect as the act of property right, that is, the act of the shed itself can make the occurrence, modification and extinction of the rights other than the property right (such as creditor's rights).

An act of property right refers to an important legal act that directly has the effect of changing the property right, and a legal act for the purpose of establishing, transferring, changing or extinguishing the real right. For example, after the act of the sales contract is established, the seller must be the act of transferring ownership, the queen of the guarantee contract must be established, and the owner of the property right must be the act of creating a pledge.

The difference between the two is that the former is the right to request, and the latter is the right to dominate; The act of matching jujube relative to the real right, the quasi-real right act is aimed at an unspecified person.

2. Types of quasi-real rights and quasi-real rights acts.

There are four types of quasi-property rights.

1. Mining rights. Including prospecting rights and mining rights.

2. Fishery rights. It refers to the right of natural persons, legal persons or other organizations to engage in breeding or fishing of aquatic animals and plants in certain waters in accordance with the provisions of law.

3. The right to water. It refers to the right of natural persons, legal persons or other organizations to use water resources such as surface water and groundwater in accordance with the provisions of law.

4. The right to use sea space. It refers to the right of natural persons, legal persons or other organizations to use and benefit from specific sea areas in accordance with the provisions of law.

In addition to the exemption of quasi-property acts, there are also the following three situations.

1. Offset. Set-off means that when two people owe debts to each other, each of them uses its creditor's rights as the repayment of the debt, so that the debts and the debts of the other party are mutually extinguished within the equal amount.

2. Confusion refers to the fact that the creditor's right and the debt belong to the same person, which in principle leads to the extinction of the debtor's relationship.

3. Deposit and withdrawal refers to the system in which when the debtor performs its due debts and refuses to receive them due to the creditor's reasons and no legitimate reasons, or the debtor is unable to perform the debts to the creditor due to the creditor's whereabouts and other reasons, the markers of the debtor's performance of the debt can be sent to the relevant departments in accordance with the law in lieu of performance. Deposit and withdrawal is a method of performance on behalf of the customer, and after the deposit, the contract is terminated.