Group 1: Case Summaries - Case 1: Li's money laundering involved illegal fundraising and transferring illegal funds totaling 535.5 million yuan, with a profit of over 100,000 yuan from providing payment services [1][2] - Case 2: Wang's fraudulent fundraising led to a loss of 20.39 million yuan, with 35,980 yuan of the funds used to establish a clothing store, which was then mixed with fraudulent funds [5][6] - Case 3: Zhang's bribery case involved 3 million yuan in bribes, which he laundered through stock trading, resulting in a two-year prison sentence [7][8] - Case 4: Long's drug trafficking case involved receiving 1,225 USDT (approximately 8,330 yuan) as payment for drug sales, which he converted to cash for personal use [9][10] - Case 5: Guo's involvement in a criminal organization led to laundering illegal funds through insurance purchases, resulting in a two-year prison sentence [11][12] Group 2: Legal Implications - The cases highlight the role of underground financial networks in laundering proceeds from various crimes, emphasizing the need for stringent legal measures against such activities [2][6] - The judicial system's stance on punishing money laundering is evident, as seen in the severe penalties imposed on offenders, which serve as a deterrent against future crimes [2][8] - The use of virtual currencies in laundering activities, particularly in drug-related crimes, poses new challenges for law enforcement and regulatory bodies [9][10]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the procedures and opinions regarding the handling of "self-laundering" issues discovered during the investigation of职务犯罪 (职务犯罪) cases by supervisory and prosecutorial authorities, emphasizing the need for coordination between these entities in both the investigation and prosecution phases [1][5]. Group 1: Case Summaries - Case 1 involves Zhang, who accepted bribes totaling 10 million yuan and subsequently laundered the money through multiple bank transfers and property purchases [2]. - Case 2 involves Liu, who accepted 3 million yuan in bribes and laundered part of it through transfers to family members' accounts and then to an overseas account, amounting to 1 million yuan [2]. Group 2: Divergent Opinions - The first opinion suggests that evidence collected during the investigation can be shared to save resources, allowing for simultaneous prosecution of both bribery and money laundering [3]. - The second opinion argues that since money laundering falls under police jurisdiction, evidence should be transferred to the police for further investigation before prosecution [4]. - The third opinion supports the idea that if evidence of money laundering is clear and sufficient, it can be included in the prosecution submission for both crimes [4]. Group 3: Evidence Collection and Use - Evidence related to "self-laundering" collected by supervisory authorities can be used in court as it meets criminal trial standards [10]. - If the prosecutorial authority finds the evidence from supervisory authorities insufficient, it can either supplement the evidence or transfer the case to the police for further investigation [11][12]. Group 4: Prosecution Procedures - If the supervisory authority has established the facts of "self-laundering" and believes it meets prosecution conditions, it can include these facts in the prosecution submission [13]. - The prosecutorial authority can directly add charges of money laundering if it finds sufficient evidence and has consulted with the supervisory and police authorities [14][15].