No abstract

In recent years, various kinds of crimes demanding debts have emerged one after another. Before the new crime of demanding illegal debts, the judicial practice in previous years was mainly regulated by the crime of robbery, the crime of unlawful detention, etc. First of all, we should define the “illegal debt”, and then analyze the act and act object in its objective elements. In the subjective elements, the intention of criminal intent should be based on the purpose of illegal possession, while the lawful purpose does not belong to the intention of criminal intent in the subjective elements of a crime.

The installation of elevators in old residential areas is one of the important livelihood projects, and the voting rules for matters jointly decided by the owners have a significant impact on the process of the project. High-floor owners and low-floor owners often have difficulty reaching a consensus on elevator funding and compensation schemes. At present, in order to smoothly promote the installation of elevators, most regions have reduced the proportion of owners’ voting consent to “double two-thirds”, and the Civil Code has also modified the rules for the owners to jointly decide on matters. But new problems have arisen in protecting the interests of a small number of owners who oppose the installation of elevators. In the context of promoting the addition of new elevators to old residences, this article focuses on the protection of the rights and interests of the minority owners and tries to propose solutions which can coordinate the interests of the multiple parties. For example, if the resolution of adding new elevator has special impact on the proper exercise of the exclusive rights of the minority owners or infringes upon the legitimate rights of the minority owners, the special consent of such owners shall be obtained; legislations should respect and protect the remedies and compensation for losses of the legitimate rights and interests of the owners who object to the addition of new elevators, improve the revocation right of the owners and regulate the scheme of capital contribution and compensation, etc.

No abstract

With the gradual entry into the aging society, the installation of elevators in existing residential buildings has gradually become an important “people’s livelihood” issue of social concern. But the transformation process has been slow. This paper believes that the “One-vote Veto System” is an important obstacle to the slow progress. The “One-vote Veto System” violates the legislative spirit of the Property Part of the “Civil Code” and should be considered by balancing the interests of various parties.