How the court can avoid becoming an "accomplice" of professional lendersCurrently, Liu Tao has a large number of "professionals" who provide "loans" to units or individuals, and the loan amounts are g

How the court can avoid becoming an "accomplice" of professional lendersCurrently, Liu Tao has a large number of "professionals" who provide "loans" to units or individuals, and the loan amounts are getting larger and larger. People” are willing to legalize their illegal interests through litigation procedures. So, how to prevent the court from becoming an "accomplice" of "professional lenders" is a big problem facing the court. Analysis of the reasons for the "increased" legal awareness of "professional lenders". In the past, most of the "loan sharks" were low-educated groups, and they were obviously simple and crude in the lending process. With the popularization of higher education and the improvement of legal awareness among Chinese citizens, today's "professional lenders" have moved away from simplicity and roughness and replaced them with "high technical content." They know how to circumvent the law during the lending process, and there is almost no trace of "loan sharking". The court found that "usury" was difficult. Under the judicial principle of "whoever claims it, who must provide evidence" and the ingenious lending methods of "professional lenders", it is almost impossible for a borrower to prove that the loan is "usury", and the court will naturally be unable to identify it. A useful attempt within the criminal scope. As the group of "professional moneylenders" continues to expand, their social harm will become more and more obvious, and it will be an inevitable trend to bring professional lending into the scope of criminal law. The crime of professional loan sharking can be added to the criminal law, and through relatively strict review in the criminal justice field, it can provide a basis for the characterization of lending behavior in civil and commercial cases. A useful attempt within the scope of civil and commercial affairs. In judicial practice, it is often found that the same person appears as the plaintiff in several private lending disputes during the trial, and the judges are very clear that these people are "professional lenders." However, due to the difficulty of identification, they really do not have time to carefully review each case ex officio, resulting in the court actually becoming an "accomplice" of "professional lenders". In this regard, we can follow the example of the "social credit system" in the United States and establish a "blacklist" system within the courts to include those parties who are highly suspected of being "professional lenders" into the court's "blacklist" for special review.