第三方平台数据显示，早在2017年，上海保银就已跻身百亿私募行列。2025年，该公司管理规模明显缩 水，且旗下多个产品收益率告负，引发市场关注。 据天眼查网站，上海保银私募基金管理有限公司（简称"上海保银"）及任某、孙某、李某遭起诉，案由 为非法经营罪，开庭时间为2026年1月22日，审理法庭为上海市长宁区人民法院第七法庭。 值得一提的是，深圳前海千惠资产管理有限公司（简称"千惠资产"）及相关成员也因非法经营罪遭到起 诉。据媒体报道，千惠资产2024年上半年便有员工被带走调查，原因大概率是"融券分仓"问题。 上海保银与千惠资产涉及的具体问题是否相同尚不得而知。 据公开资料，上海保银成立于2014年，法定代表人为李墨，注册资本1000万元，管理规模为50亿至100 亿元。 合规方面，上海保银于2024年7月曾被上海证监局采取责令改正的行政监管措施。 具体而言，上海保银在私募基金运营过程中存在将基金投资管理职责擅自委托他人行使的行为。上海保 银时任法定代表人、执行董事、总经理李墨，时任合规风控负责人鲍佳溶，二人双双收到证监局警示 函。 另需注意的是，上海保银还在2025年12月19日提交了高管变更信息，不过最新状 ...

突发！知名量化私募，涉嫌非法经营罪 来源：南财社 私募因为投资亏损被告的并不少见，但被起诉犯非法经营罪，走上刑事审判法庭的还是业内罕见。 最近，上海长宁法院一则开庭公告引起金融圈关注，被告人是一家知名量化私募公司，深圳前海千惠资 产有限公司（以下简称"千惠资产"）及相关成员，案由竟然是非法经营罪。 | 湖泉 | 法庭 | 开题日期 | 高号 | 紫由 | 承办部门 | 中国长/主宰 | 图语/上诉人 | 被告/被上诉人 | 开原类型 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | | | | | 14 | | | | | 上海市长宁区人民 烧烤 | | 2026-01-15 (2025) IP0105用 09:30:00 | 初151号 | 非法经营管 | 别事市列 18 | 宋语然 | | 吴奖骰,给冠伦,爱圳蔚 周千赢资产管理有限公 司,给选龙,躲爆伟 | 开窗 | | | 湖北市区 | | | | | | | | | 非法经营可不是什么小事，而是直接触及刑法的违法犯罪活动。而刑事案件通过都是先由公安机关立案 侦查 ...

Core Viewpoint - The illegal sale of fireworks and firecrackers is a growing concern, with multiple arrests made for violations of safety regulations and laws regarding their storage and sale [1][3][5]. Group 1: Illegal Sales and Enforcement Actions - Shanghai police discovered illegal sales of fireworks through online advertisements, leading to the identification and investigation of a local company [3]. - The company’s owner, identified as Shi, purchased fireworks for personal use but attempted to sell them for profit, resulting in police intervention before any sales occurred [5]. - Multiple cases across different regions, including Anhui, Shandong, and Zhejiang, highlight the trend of individuals illegally selling fireworks via social media, leading to administrative detentions [5][7][9]. Group 2: Legal Regulations and Requirements - According to the Fireworks Safety Management Regulations, selling fireworks requires a retail license, and businesses must comply with safety production supervision [11]. - Posting sales information in social media is legal only if it directs customers to a designated sales location; otherwise, it constitutes illegal activity [11]. - Individuals involved in the illegal sale of fireworks, especially those with significant financial transactions, may face criminal charges for illegal business operations [11][12]. Group 3: Legal Responsibilities - Sharing or forwarding advertisements for the sale of fireworks also incurs legal responsibilities, implicating both sellers and those who promote such sales [12][13]. - In the event of any issues arising from sold fireworks, both the seller and the promoter may be held legally accountable [13].

来源：央视新闻客户端 根据我国相关规定，从事烟草零售必须取得专卖许可证，未经许可擅自经营涉嫌违法。但是，有些人却 在高额利润的驱使下，私下贩卖香烟。 近日，四川宜宾市屏山县警方公布了一起侦破跨境走私假烟犯罪案件。 2024年7月，四川宜宾屏山县烟草专卖局接到群众举报，有人在当地富荣镇某工地散发名片，推销云 烟、玉溪等多款畅销香烟。烟草部门随即把线索移交公安，双方成立专案组联手侦办。 屏山县公安局森警大队民警 代巍：我们通过名片信息检索，发现发名片的人叫周某，是有多次前科的 刑释人员，曾因非法经营罪，故意伤害致人死亡罪，多次被公安机关打击处理，如今在我们当地的一处 工地承包土石方转运业务。 民警调查发现，周某在没有取得烟草专卖许可证的情况下，却在朋友圈里兜售各类畅销香烟，种种行为 已涉嫌非法经营罪。为了确认他所售香烟的真伪及来源，民警对他展开调查。民警在周某居住的小区对 面楼里设立观察点，实行24小时跟踪，并安装隐蔽摄像头监控其行踪。 监控画面显示，周某多次携带纸箱、黑色口袋往返住所，其间还有陌生男子频繁上门取货，这些物品被 民警高度怀疑为涉案香烟，上门人员则可能是其下家。 屏山县公安局森警大队民警 代巍：对他 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Chengdu Jin Niu Court has sentenced three individuals for illegally operating nitrous oxide (commonly known as "laughing gas") without the necessary hazardous chemicals business license, highlighting the legal implications and risks associated with the trade of restricted substances [1][2]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The defendants, Zhang, Chen, and Zhang, were found guilty of illegal business operations involving nitrous oxide, receiving prison sentences ranging from seven months to one year, along with fines between 40,000 to 80,000 yuan [2]. - The court determined that the defendants' actions constituted a serious violation of national regulations, as they operated without the required hazardous chemicals business license [2]. Group 2: Criminal Activities - From February to June 2025, the defendants transported nitrous oxide to users, believing they would only face detention, which reflects a significant underestimation of the legal consequences of their actions [2]. - The defendants earned substantial profits during this period, with Zhang earning over 30,000 yuan, Chen 80,000 yuan, and Zhang 40,000 yuan [2]. Group 3: Regulatory Context - Nitrous oxide is classified as a hazardous chemical and is subject to strict regulations; its production, operation, storage, transportation, and use without a license are illegal and can lead to criminal charges [3]. - The court's ruling serves as a reminder for the public to be aware of the legal status of nitrous oxide and to report any illegal activities related to its sale or use [3].

Core Viewpoint - The implementation of the new gold tax policy has led to confusion among consumers regarding tax obligations when converting gold bars into jewelry, with varying practices across different regions [1][2]. Group 1: Tax Policy Changes - The new gold tax policy marks a significant shift from unified tax benefits to classified management, clearly distinguishing between "investment use" and "non-investment use" [2][3]. - Under the new regulations, personal gold bars converted into jewelry still incur consumption tax based on processing fees, despite previous inconsistencies in enforcement across regions [2][3]. Group 2: Compliance and Risks - Consumers must be aware of tax compliance requirements when converting gold bars into jewelry, including the necessity to choose qualified processing merchants and obtain detailed invoices [3][4]. - There are potential legal and financial risks associated with using unqualified processing services, including the risk of receiving substandard products and difficulties in asserting consumer rights [4][5]. Group 3: Market Implications - The new tax policy may indirectly increase the cost of jewelry processing by approximately 7% due to changes in the VAT deduction ratio for gold bars purchased from exchanges [3]. - Consumers are advised to consider the implications of processing on the resale value of gold bars, as banks typically do not repurchase processed items [4][5].

Core Viewpoint - The evolution of the crime of illegal business operations reflects the complexity of economic and social development, transforming from a specific economic regulatory tool into a "catch-all" crime in market economic activities, posing unprecedented challenges for criminal defense [1]. Summary by Sections Legislative Evolution and Normative Structure - The regulatory framework of illegal business operations has evolved from specific to abstract, initially defined in 1997 with three specific scenarios, including unauthorized operation of exclusive goods and serious disruption of market order. This design reflected a clear delineation of economic regulation at that time [2]. - The scope of application has expanded through amendments and judicial interpretations, now encompassing over ten specific types, including illegal payment settlement and telecommunications operations, alongside a catch-all clause for "other serious disruptions to market order" [2]. - The crime's constitutive elements include three key factors: violation of national regulations, engagement in illegal business activities, and severity of circumstances, providing multiple layers of operational space for defense [2]. Typological Analysis: Main Behavior Patterns and Defense Points 1. **Unauthorized Operation of Specific Business Types** - Cases involve sectors like finance and telecommunications, with defense focusing on the scope and validity of administrative licenses. For instance, in illegal payment settlement cases, it is crucial to distinguish between mere fund transfers and professional payment services [3]. - In the publishing sector, the defense should differentiate between content legality and procedural legality, arguing that minor procedural flaws do not warrant criminal penalties [3]. 2. **Use of Prohibited Business Methods** - This category includes behaviors like cashing out via POS machines and pyramid schemes. The defense should accurately determine the nature of the actions and assess the social harm of the methods used [4]. - In credit card cash-out cases, distinguishing between legitimate promotions and illegal cash-outs is essential, while in pyramid scheme cases, the focus should be on the legitimacy of the profit sources [4]. 3. **Application of Other Catch-All Clauses** - For cases invoking the catch-all clause, a cautious approach is necessary, emphasizing the need to assess whether the actions reach a level of social harm comparable to explicitly defined types [5]. Multi-layered Defense Strategies 1. **Legality Level Defense** - Defense should scrutinize the "national regulations" cited in accusations, as only laws and administrative regulations can serve as bases for criminal liability, excluding departmental or local regulations [6]. - It is vital to check if the national regulations explicitly set criminal liability; if only administrative responsibility is mentioned, the principle of "no crime without a clear law" should be invoked [6]. 2. **Business Behavior Level Defense** - The core issue is distinguishing between "unlicensed operation" and "exceeding operational scope," requiring a review of business licenses and administrative permits [7]. - For technical service cases, the defense should argue the legitimate uses of the technology provided, demonstrating that the individual did not specifically support illegal activities [7]. 3. **Subjective Intent Level Defense** - The recognition of subjective intent is crucial, with defense focusing on the individual's professional background and understanding of the legality of their actions [8]. - In cases of joint crime, it is important to differentiate the subjective awareness of each participant, particularly those providing ancillary services [8]. 4. **Circumstantial Recognition Level Defense** - The determination of severity directly impacts the distinction between crime and non-crime, necessitating a detailed examination of quantitative indicators like business revenue and illegal gains [9]. - The defense should also evaluate the social harm of the actions, especially in emerging industries, to argue that exploratory mistakes in business development should not be criminalized [9]. Evidence Examination: Key Strategies - Evidence examination is a critical defense stage, focusing on the completeness of financial materials and the appropriateness of auditing methods [10]. - For electronic evidence, the legality of its extraction and the integrity of the data chain must be scrutinized, as it often plays a key role in determining business models and amounts [10]. - The analysis of testimonial evidence should identify contradictions and doubts to construct a favorable narrative for the defendant [10]. Policy Understanding: Application of Criminal Policy in Defense - Understanding the impact of criminal policy on the application of illegal business operations is essential, particularly in cases involving private enterprises [11]. - The defense should leverage policies encouraging innovation to argue for caution in criminal intervention, presenting industry analysis and expert opinions to highlight the unique nature of the business [11]. - Attention should be paid to established judicial practices and precedents that can support the defense's arguments, especially in contentious areas like the application of catch-all clauses [11]. Conclusion: Balancing Order and Innovation - The defense of illegal business operations fundamentally seeks to balance the maintenance of economic order with the development of market innovation, requiring a deep understanding of social and economic trends [17]. - Successful defense strategies must adhere to the principle of legality while limiting the expansion of catch-all clauses, ensuring that criminal prosecutions do not become overly broad [17]. - Through a typological analysis and refined defense strategies, each case can find the most suitable defense path, achieving a balance between individual justice and legal integrity [17].

Core Viewpoint - The case involving Wang, accused of illegal business operations, achieved a significant breakthrough with the intervention of attorney Chen Sainan, who successfully argued for the non-approval of arrest by the prosecution, thereby protecting the legal rights of the client [1][3]. Group 1: Case Background - Wang was implicated in a case concerning his wife's supermarket, which was under investigation for allegedly illegally operating tobacco products, with the amount involved exceeding tens of millions [1]. - The sudden criminal prosecution placed Wang and his family in a difficult situation, as they faced both economic and mental pressures, particularly with an elderly mother requiring care and the supermarket nearing closure due to lack of management [1]. Group 2: Legal Strategy - Attorney Chen Sainan quickly engaged in comprehensive investigation and legal analysis, identifying three key breakthroughs: the supermarket held a valid tobacco retail license, Wang was merely a temporary helper without involvement in core business decisions, and the products sold were genuine cigarettes, causing no tax loss or consumer harm [2]. - A dual defense strategy was implemented, aiming for both acquittal and the request for non-arrest, with detailed legal opinions submitted to the investigation and prosecution authorities [2]. Group 3: Outcome and Implications - Through multiple communications with the authorities, attorney Chen effectively articulated the case facts and legal basis, leading to the prosecution's acceptance of the arguments and the decision to not approve the arrest, allowing Wang to return home to care for his mother [3]. - The successful outcome of this case highlights the importance of legal expertise, case analysis capabilities, and effective communication in the judicial process, reflecting the principles of subjective-objective unity and the restraint of criminal law in practice [3].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the application of probation for individuals convicted of illegal business activities, emphasizing the conditions under which probation may be granted and providing case studies to illustrate these points [2][7]. Summary by Sections Definition and Legal Framework - Illegal business activities are defined as actions that disrupt market order and are conducted without proper authorization, including unauthorized sales of restricted items and illegal financial operations [3]. - The conditions for applying probation include: 1. The crime must be of a relatively minor nature, considering factors such as the amount involved and the impact on market order [3]. 2. The offender must demonstrate remorse through actions such as confessing, returning illegal gains, and apologizing to victims [3]. Assessment of Probation Eligibility - Additional conditions for probation eligibility include: 1. No risk of reoffending, which is assessed based on the offender's history and behavior during the legal process [4]. 2. The probation must not have a significant negative impact on the community, evaluated through the offender's community relations and compliance with laws during the probation period [6]. Case Studies - Case Study 1: An individual named Li sold cigarettes without a license, with a total illegal business amount of 50,000 yuan and illegal gains of 5,000 yuan. Li showed remorse by confessing and returning the illegal gains, leading to a probation sentence of one year and six months [6][7]. - Case Study 2: An individual named Zhang engaged in unauthorized foreign exchange trading with illegal business amounts of 2 million yuan and illegal gains of 200,000 yuan. Zhang's refusal to cooperate and history of similar offenses led to a three-year prison sentence without probation [7]. Legal Representation Strategies - Legal representatives should: 1. Thoroughly understand the case facts and the nature of the illegal activities to build a strong defense [8]. 2. Encourage the offender to express remorse and take responsibility for their actions [9]. 3. Facilitate the return of illegal gains to demonstrate remorse and reduce social harm [9]. 4. Communicate with the community to obtain supportive statements regarding the offender's character and the impact of probation [9].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the alarming case of a Wuhan citizen, Mr. Gao, who fell into a cycle of debt after taking out a loan of 200,000 yuan, leading to a total borrowing of 17.4158 million yuan and repayments of 28.876 million yuan, yet still being told he owes over 4.7 million yuan [1][8][12]. Group 1: Loan Details - Mr. Gao initially borrowed 200,000 yuan but received only 188,000 yuan after deducting fees, which is a common practice known as "head-cutting interest" [4][6]. - The first loan led to immediate pressure to repay 41,000 yuan, and due to financial constraints, he was encouraged to take new loans to pay off old ones [5][6]. - Over time, Mr. Gao took approximately 100 loans, resulting in a total borrowing of 17.4158 million yuan and repayments of 28.876 million yuan, with a remaining debt of over 4.7 million yuan [8][12]. Group 2: Legal Implications - Six lenders have been detained for illegal business practices, with some facing serious charges under the law [9][12]. - The average interest rates on these loans were reported to be over 500 times the legal limit set by the government, which has recently changed to be based on the LPR index [12][13]. - The article emphasizes that practices like "head-cutting interest" and "trap loans" are targeted by law enforcement, with offenders facing potential prison sentences of five years or more [13].