Borrow money to gamble on others, do you have to return this money?

It is said that it is owed to debt and repay the money

Heavenly righteousness

But borrow money gambling to others

Can this money still come back?

01

Basic case

On January 14, 2021, Zhang borrowed from Cheng Mou who was present after losing his gambling capital. Cheng Mou 60,000 yuan a total of 5,000 yuan each time for a total of 30,000 yuan for his continued gambling. This amount is delivered in cash.

The next day, Zhang issued a debit to Cheng, stating that the amount of borrowing was 45,000 yuan and a monthly interest rate of 2 points, and agreed that "the interest was paid in full monthly, otherwise the creditors had the right to ask the borrower to return the loan in advance."

After repeatedly urged the loan, Cheng Mou sued the court and asked Zhang to return the plaintiff to return the plaintiff Cheng to borrow 30,000 yuan and interest.

There are two opinions in the trial:

The first opinion believes that the plaintiff Cheng knew in advance that the defendant Zhang's loan was still provided by the gambling violation. It belonged to the violation of laws and administrative regulations stipulated in Article 153 of the Civil Code. The requesting interest is not supported according to law, but according to Article 157 of the Civil Code, Zhang should still return to Cheng's loan principal and pay the losses of funds after the expiration of the loan period.

The second opinion is that Article 8 of the Civil Code stipulates that civil subjects shall not violate the law, and must not violate public order and customs. In this case, in order to earn high interest, Cheng Mou borrowed 30,000 yuan to gambling at the gambling site six times at the gambling site. Subjectively, there was a malice to use the borrower's gambling behavior to obtain illegal benefits. Objectively, Zhang was Zhang Zhang A certain participation in gambling provides conditions and promotes the occurrence of gambling behaviors. Gambling is a prohibited behavior of my country's laws. For the act of providing gambling funds to others at the gambling site, it is not protected by law.

02

Referee result

The judgment of this case adopted a second opinion, that is, the judgment rejected Cheng's request.

At the same time, due to the issue of civil and administrative cross -issues in this case, the gambling violations of the parties have been transferred to the public security organs for treatment in accordance with the law.

03

Evaluation

The reason why this case is dealt with is due to the lack of deviation and specific rules of the legal understanding of the law. Article 153 of the Civil Code stipulates that civil legal acts that violate the mandatory regulations of laws and administrative regulations are invalid. At the same time, Article 157 stipulates that after the civil legal act is invalid, the property obtained by the behavior shall be returned, discounted or compensated for losses. According to this, it is believed that if the lender knows in advance that the borrowing of others is still provided by illegal and criminal activities such as gambling, the loan contract is invalid, and after the contract is invalid, the borrower should return the borrowing principal.

We believe that the above understanding is biased. From a legal point of view, based on the theory of paying for illegal reasons, if the purpose of the payment is to allow the recipients to violate the ban or good customs stipulated in the law due to receiving payment, the receiving people have the obligation to return, and the payment person is responsible for this illegal behavior. Do not request a return, thereby reaching a punishment for the criminal payment behavior executor. It can be seen that for those who use borrowing to give others for gambling, their legal consequences should be determined based on whether the borrower should deal with illegal behavior. The lender is involved in gambling behavior, and its return request does not support it.

The analysis of the specific situation is as follows:

01

Lenders know or know that others' loans are used for gambling and still provide borrowing, but the borrowers did not participate in or performed the gambling behavior. According to the provisions of the Chinese Civil Code, the loan contract was invalid, and the interest agreed on the borrowing stipulated in accordance with the law will not be given law. support. At this time, because the occurrence of borrowing behavior and gambling violations did not have a legal cause and effect, and the borrowers had no obvious responsibility for the occurrence of gambling behaviors, the request to return the principal to the principal should be supported. This is also the main situation of the people's court's judgment that the loan contract is invalid and the borrower returns the principal.

02

For those who borrow funds to be gambling at the gambling site, they should generally be identified as a behavior of participating in gambling (providing gambling funds), and they are involved in the implementation of gambling violations. The behavior violates the provisions of the "civil subject engaged in civil activities, must not violate the law, and must not violate public order and good customs" stipulated in Article 8 of the Civil Code. The behavior itself is an illegal behavior. The request for litigation should be rejected according to law.

Compared with the borrowing item beforehand of the gambling of others, but there is no participation in gambling, those who provide funds for others at the scene can generally be identified as the participation of gambling behaviors. The funds are already gambling when the borrower provides the gambling person. According to the provisions of my country's Public Security Management Punishment Law, gambling funds should be collected. Even if the contract is invalidated, it should be noted that for the legal consequences of invalid the contract, Article 157 of the Civil Code on the basis of "returning primary, discount compensation or compensation loss" stipulated in Article 58 of the original contract law, adding regulations If there are regulations, in accordance with its regulations. " Then, for the facts that are essentially involved in gambling and provide gambling funds, it is another provisions of the Public Security Management Punishment Law, and gambling funds should be collected in accordance with the law instead of judgment. From the perspective of the value -oriented value of the referee, if you provide judicial protection to other people at the scene, if you provide judicial protection, you will also condone gambling habits and contrary to the value of the judicial value.

03

Although the borrowing items of gambling actors at the gambling site, the borrowing behavior is passive and coerced, and there is no participation in gambling behavior.The money should still be protected by civil law.However, whether it is stretching and passively borrowing, the lender shall bear the responsibility of proof.04

Although the borrowers are not borrowed at the scene, the lender has obvious promotion of gambling maliciousness. The borrowing behavior has a considerable effect on the occurrence of gambling violations.The request is not supported according to law.

Source: Jiangsu High Court

- END -