Recently, in a special case involving predatory lending handled by Attorney Hu Rui of King&Capital Law Firm, despite facing intense scrutiny, early intervention by the procuratorate, and an extremely high risk of arrest, the defense team seized the critical 37-day window to precisely distinguish between legitimate private lending and predatory lending crimes, thereby mounting a thorough and compelling defense of innocence on behalf of the client. Ultimately, the procuratorate accepted the defense’s arguments and decided not to approve the arrest, allowing the client to regain his freedom. This case achieved a critical reversal against the backdrop of intense pressure from the special investigation, fully demonstrating the defense attorney’s professional expertise and case-handling capabilities in the areas of major economic crimes, predatory lending cases, and pre-arrest defense.
I. High-Pressure Special Campaign and Strict Legal Characterization: Client Faced Significant Risk of Arrest
In recent years, against the backdrop of special campaigns targeting organized crime, predatory lending, and illegal lending, a large number of private lending cases from previous years have been re-examined, filed, and even prosecuted. Many cases that were originally handled as civil disputes may now be transferred to criminal proceedings and prosecuted under charges such as illegal business operations, fraud, or extortion.
This case is a locally prioritized, high-profile “predatory lending” investigation involving public welfare. The client represented by Attorney Hu Rui is a renowned expert in a certain industry who engaged in normal private lending with the counterparty based on genuine financial needs and borrowing requirements. Subsequently, due to the counterparty’s heavy debt burden leading to personal hardships, the case was incorporated into the investigation scope for strict enforcement, and the client was criminally detained on suspicion of fraud.
Faced with multiple adverse factors—including intense pressure from the special investigation and the risk of being broadly classified as a “predatory lending” crime—and compounded by the client’s status as a public figure, an arrest warrant would have caused irreparable damage to his personal reputation and professional career. Consequently, the defense faced immense pressure and a heavy burden of responsibility.
II. Accurately Assessing the Nature of the Case, Clarifying the Boundaries Between Criminal and Non-Criminal Acts, and Establishing a Strategy for an Acquittal Defense
Upon accepting the retainer, Attorney Hu Rui immediately met with the client to gain a comprehensive understanding of the entire process—including the formation of the lending agreement, the actual delivery of funds, interest arrangements, and methods of debt collection. He carefully listened to the client’s statements and requests, patiently reassured the client, and conducted the defense with the core objective of maximizing the protection of the client’s legitimate rights and interests.
Attorney Hu Rui has long specialized in economic crime cases involving professional lending and “predatory lending” schemes, possessing a deep understanding of the judicial standards and core defense strategies for such cases. Drawing on extensive experience with similar cases, he thoroughly reviewed the facts, closely adhered to the “Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Handling of Criminal Cases Involving ‘Predatory Lending’ Schemes” issued by the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, and the Ministry of Justice, and conducted an in-depth analysis of the case in conjunction with the elements of the crime of fraud. After a comprehensive analysis, Attorney Hu Rui concluded that the client’s conduct did not meet the statutory elements of either “predatory lending” or fraud, both subjectively and objectively, and thus established a defense strategy based on the client’s innocence.
III. Conducting a Systematic Defense Focused on the Elements of the Crime, Resolutely Preventing the Improper Use of Criminal Measures in Civil Disputes
Subsequently, Attorney Hu Rui, relying on facts and the law, clearly articulated the core defense arguments to the investigating authorities: Subjectively, the client had only a genuine intention to lend funds and obtain reasonable returns, without any intent to illegally appropriate another’s property, which completely contradicts the core subjective element of “intent to illegally appropriate” required for “predatory lending”; Objectively, the client had actually provided the full amount of funds; there were no typical “predatory lending” behaviors such as inflating debts, maliciously creating defaults, using violence or soft violence to collect debts, or filing fraudulent lawsuits. The financial transactions between the parties conformed to the characteristics of normal private lending and did not involve any criminal illegality. Furthermore, all claims for debt were pursued through legitimate civil channels, remaining within the scope of civil law regulation, and thus fundamentally distinct from criminal offenses. Accordingly, the client’s conduct does not constitute the crime of fraud or any “predatory lending” offenses under the law.
To fully articulate the defense arguments and facilitate the case’s positive progression, Attorney Hu Rui maintained in-depth communication with the investigating officers from the public security authorities throughout the defense process. His professional opinions were taken seriously by the investigating authorities, laying a solid foundation for subsequent defense efforts.
After the case entered the stage of review and approval for arrest, Attorney Hu Rui, while fully respecting the client’s wishes, continued to conduct a not-guilty defense in accordance with the law, making every effort to safeguard the client’s legitimate rights and interests. Attorney Hu Rui promptly submitted a well-reasoned legal opinion to the procuratorate arguing against approval for arrest and engaged in in-depth exchanges with the prosecuting attorney on multiple occasions. He consistently focused his professional arguments on the fact that the client’s conduct did not meet the elements of fraud or “predatory lending” crimes, resolutely preventing the improper use of criminal measures in civil and economic disputes.
IV. Prosecutorial Authorities Adopt Defense Arguments; No Arrest Approved Within the 37-Day Critical Window; Client Regains Personal Freedom
Ultimately, after a comprehensive and rigorous review, the prosecutorial authorities fully adopted Attorney Hu Rui’s defense arguments and lawfully issued a decision not to approve the arrest. The client was successfully released and returned to normal work and life. The client and their family expressed deep gratitude for Attorney Hu Rui’s professional competence, dedication, and crisis management skills.
As a successful case of pre-arrest not-guilty defense within a key supervised special operation targeting “loan scam” schemes, this case upheld the principle of legality in criminal law under intense pressure, precisely delineated the legal boundaries between private lending and criminal offenses, achieved a critical turnaround in a complex situation, and effectively avoided the risk of improper arrest. While safeguarding the client’s freedom and reputation, it fully demonstrated the professional value and sense of responsibility of criminal defense attorneys in major and complex economic crime cases.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
