Some recent corruption cases have shown that some bribe takers often "accept but not accept", that is, they agree with the bribe giver to have someone else hold or keep the property on their behalf. A typical example of this is the "briber holding type" of bribery, which involves agreeing that the property will be held or kept by the briber, and ensuring that the briber can access it at any time. Unlike the traditional approach of "paying with one hand and handling affairs with the other", in such cases, both parties involved in bribery often conceal their true intentions and delay the transaction, with the intention of evading punishment. What are the characteristics of this type of bribery behavior? How to accurately identify and strictly investigate? How to use cases to promote reform and governance? The reporter conducted an interview. "The methods and forms of bribery by the 'briber holding type' are numerous and more covert, making it difficult to investigate and deal with cases. 'The' briber holding type 'bribery is more covert and difficult to investigate.' Zhang Guanchao, director of the Fourth Discipline Inspection and Supervision Office of the Laixi City Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision in Shandong Province, said that the two parties involved in bribery often have a high degree of tacit understanding. The briber takes care of or takes care of the stolen funds and goods on their behalf, and the briber and their relatives do not directly hold them, making it difficult for the outside world to detect. In 2023, the committee investigated a relevant typical case. From 2015 to 2016, Lu Min, then Chairman of Qingdao Urban Investment Financial Holding Group Co., Ltd., was requested by businessman Wang to take advantage of his position to support the establishment of a private fund management limited company and provide assistance in business operations. As a token of gratitude, Wang gave Lu Min a 15% equity stake in the company, which he will hold on his behalf. From 2016 to 2023, Lu Min received a total of 4.35 million yuan in dividends from the equity. Later, Lu Min arranged for Wang to invest the aforementioned dividends in multiple fund projects to obtain greater returns. In August 2023, Lu Min was expelled from the Party and public office, and his suspected criminal issues were transferred to the procuratorial organs for legal review and prosecution. Zhou Jianjie, Deputy Director of the First Discipline Inspection and Supervision Office of the Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision of Binjiang District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, told reporters that this type of bribery behavior mainly has the following characteristics: first, limited scope of knowledge, the bribe taker hiding behind the scenes, and holding property through the bribe taker; The second is for both parties involved in bribery to reach a consensus, based on the actual payment ability of the briber, on the personnel, methods, subject matter and receiving form of the bribery, and specific profit seeking matters; The third is that there are various forms of entrusted assets, including cash, real estate, equity, and other assets, and the bribe taker has actual control over the use of them; The fourth is the concealment of conflicting interests, often through verbal agreements rather than written agreements to clarify the interests of both parties. Individual party members and leading cadres attempted to evade investigation and made agreements with management service recipients to pay "benefits" after retirement. From 2003 to 2006, Yang Chenghua served as the Secretary and Director of the Party Committee of the Supply and Marketing Cooperative Society in Fuyang City, Zhejiang Province, and provided assistance to Lu on a certain real estate project. Yang Chenghua and Lu agreed that the 2.8 million yuan benefit fee would be kept by Lu on his behalf and would be redeemed after his retirement. In 2017, after retiring for over a year, Yang Chenghua received this money in three installments. In April 2024, Yang Chenghua was sentenced to nine years and six months in prison and fined 500000 yuan for embezzlement of public funds and bribery. Not only equity and money, but also property has become a key target of such proxy holding behavior. In 2019, Ye, former deputy district chief of a certain district in Yangzhou City, Jiangsu Province, wanted to purchase a property. The general manager of a certain company, Gao, took the initiative to pay for the property on behalf of Ye, considering his years of "help" to the company. Afterwards, Ye selected a commercial house worth 2.38 million yuan and requested the real estate company to reserve it for him. Due to concerns about risks, after Gao made the payment for him, Ye instructed Gao not to sign online for the time being. After Ye, Gao, and others inspected the house together and completed the procedures for obtaining the house, Ye arranged for Gao to bring back the property information such as keys, electricity cards, and access control cards. Until the time of the Ye case, the property had not yet been signed and filed online. "On the surface, the property may not appear to be owned by Ye, but in reality, Ye had previously worked for Gao's profit, and Ye's authority had control over Gao's company's operations. Gao obeyed Ye's words, and Ye had actual control over the property. In form, he had already reached an agreement to accept bribes, which infringed on his integrity. Therefore, it was determined that his bribery of 2.38 million yuan was completed." The investigators from the Discipline Inspection Commission and Supervision Commission of Hanjiang District, Yangzhou City, who investigated and dealt with the case of Gao, explained. Focusing on the key points and conducting multiple investigations, the hidden bribery behavior has nowhere to hide. "At that time, it was very difficult to decide whether or not to pay this money, but in the end, greed took the upper hand and chose to put it in Lu's place first. I thought this was the safest way to leave enough room for myself, so that if something happens in the future, I can also admit or deny it..." In the face of the review and investigation, Yuan, former Party Secretary and Chairman of Jiangsu Yangtze River Mouth Development Group Co., Ltd., handed it over. From 2019 to 2020, Yuan assisted financing intermediary Lu in undertaking four trade financing businesses at the Yangtze River Estuary Group. According to Yuan's requirements, Yuan and Lu agreed that Yuan would receive a benefit fee of 1.7 million yuan from Lu and that Lu would be responsible for safekeeping on his behalf, without actual delivery. In November 2023, Yuan was sentenced to six years and three months in prison and fined 300000 yuan for the crime of bribery. "In such corruption cases, the investigated parties often rely on proxy holding to conceal the chain of interest transmission." Dong Haibo, Director of the Fourth Review and Investigation Office of the Jurong Municipal Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision in Jiangsu Province, stated that we should closely monitor the key points, conduct multiple investigations, lock in the chain of power realization, form a closed loop of evidence, and make bribery hidden behind the scenes nowhere to hide. Dong Haibo gave an example of conducting a comprehensive analysis of the life experiences, growth processes, and power trajectories of the investigated individuals under review. He identified individuals with frequent interactions in their family and friends circle, teacher-student circle, comrade circle, hometown circle, and interest circle, and identified those with close relationships; Analyze and investigate the risk points of corruption, closely monitor the regions, fields, and links that are prone to corruption, and determine the main direction of attack; Using big data technology to analyze electronic data such as industry and commerce, taxation, judiciary, and finance, and finding breakthroughs. "To restore seemingly unrelated information fragments such as people, events, and objects into an information network, accurately analyze their internal connections, and uncover the doubts behind the surface," said Dong Haibo. From 2013 to 2020, Lin Moubin, former director of a technology center in Guangdong Province, provided assistance to a digital company in contracting an engineering project. The company's head, Xie Moubin, informed Lin Moubin that he had used someone else's bank account to separately store the benefits fee of 700000 yuan, which could be used and withdrawn at any time. Lin Moubin agreed; From 2014 to 2015, Lin provided assistance to a technology company in undertaking engineering projects and agreed with the deputy general manager of the company, Zhang, to charge a commission of 10% of the contract amount, which is 2 million yuan. Lin received 500000 yuan through bank transfer, and the remaining 1.5 million yuan was entrusted to Zhang for safekeeping, but was not actually obtained; From 2014 to 2018, Lin provided assistance to an information technology company in contracting an engineering project. He agreed with the legal representative of the company, Liu, to collect a commission of 10% of the contract amount, which is 3.17 million yuan, and hand it over to Liu for safekeeping. As of the incident, Lin had not yet extracted the 5.37 million yuan held by the briber, and was deemed to have attempted bribery. In July 2022, Lin Moubin was sentenced to five years in prison and fined 400000 yuan for bribery. There is a certain degree of uncertainty when the briber holds the property on behalf of the briber, as objectively speaking, the property held on behalf of the briber is under the control of the briber, and it may be due to the briber's retraction that the briber is unable to actually obtain the property. Therefore, whether it constitutes bribery completion depends on whether the briber can actually control the property Ma Ling, Director of the Case Trial Office of the Discipline Inspection Commission and Supervision Commission in Huadu District, Guangzhou City, Guangdong Province, explained that at the time of the incident, Lin Moubin was about to retire, which weakened the power and influence of the job system on enterprise personnel such as Xie Moumou, Zhang Moumou, and Liu Moumou. At the same time, considering that the relevant property was not actually obtained, neither actually possessed nor actually used, and that Lin Moubin had also asked Zhang to deliver the 1 million yuan that was kept on his behalf, but due to being used by Zhang for other purposes, only 500000 yuan was finally delivered. Therefore, the portion of promised bribes that have not been actually obtained is considered as attempted. Penetrating the guise of "proxy holding" and accurately grasping the essence of power and money transactions, "due to the lack of obvious property transfer processes in such cases, it is necessary to use more comprehensive and powerful evidence to construct a proof chain, so as to discover the essence of the case through the guise of" proxy holding "." Ma Chao, Deputy Director of the Sixth Discipline Inspection and Supervision Office of the Discipline Inspection Commission and Supervision Commission of Shangcheng District, Hangzhou, said that the key to determining such cases lies in: first, the influence of the bribe taker on the bribe taker, that is, whether the bribe taker can make the bribe taker listen to him, so that the bribe taker can control the entrusted property through him; The second is the power of the bribe taker over the property, that is, whether the bribe taker can actually control the relevant property, such as whether they can possess and use it, obtain profits, extract and transfer it, sell and redeem it, etc. Yang Ronghua, director of the Second Discipline Inspection and Supervision Office of the Commission for Discipline Inspection of Fuyang District, Hangzhou, said that the content of the bribery agreement includes two aspects, namely, "acceptance" and "holding on behalf". Usually, only agreeing to "accept" without agreeing to "hold on behalf of" is usually just a communication of criminal intent, and the crime has not yet been initiated, so it is not suitable to be recognized as a bribery crime; Only when both receiving and holding are agreed upon, and there is power and behavior to control property, can a complete agreement to accept bribes be reached, which can be recognized as a bribery crime. Several disciplinary inspection and supervision officials have stated that "bribery cases held by bribe givers" are a new type of corruption method that requires comprehensive analysis and judgment based on the facts and evidence of each case. It is not appropriate to simply define them as "bribery crimes if there is an agreement" or as "failure to obtain property". In the view of Chen Qiao, Deputy Director of the Second Discipline Inspection and Supervision Office of the Binjiang District Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision in Hangzhou, "precision" is the key to dealing with such bribery. Specifically, on the one hand, precise and qualitative handling is necessary. For the amount of bribery, it is necessary to follow the provisions of discipline and law, and combine the true meaning of the bribery amount by the involved personnel, as well as the difference in the amount of property held at the time of receipt and the time of the incident for final determination. On the other hand, it is necessary to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness. For cases where there are price fluctuations in original stocks, real estate, and other entrusted assets, it is necessary to accurately determine the amount of bribery and its fruits, which not only demonstrates the strength of strict punishment for corruption, but also ensures that the case is handled fairly and justly. Systemic governance, focusing on eradicating the soil and conditions for the breeding of corruption. Many officials from the Discipline Inspection Commission and Supervision Commission in various regions have stated that in order to crack down on "bribe givers holding type" bribery, the key is to grasp the essence of bribery rights and money transactions, start with investigating illegal use of power, and see if there is an agreement to hold property on behalf of others. For example, both parties repeatedly confirm the agreement to hold property on behalf of others, and whether the bribe taker is always aware of the profits and losses of related property investments, equity changes, and profits. At the same time, disciplinary inspection and supervision organs should strengthen the in-depth analysis, precise identification, and strict crackdown on such new types of corruption cases. Through issuing guiding cases, increasing case investigation efforts, strict supervision and accountability, and strengthening disciplinary education, they should resolutely eradicate the soil and conditions for the breeding of corruption. Establish a big data model supervision mechanism. The Public Power Big Data Special Team of the Fuyang District Commission for Discipline Inspection and Supervision in Hangzhou continues to deepen cooperation with relevant departments such as banks, taxation, and auditing. Combining the characteristics of new and implicit corruption, relevant early warning models are established. Through the reporting mechanism of personal matters of leaders and the precise screening of big data, efforts are made to quickly identify clues and improve the penetration of supervision, discipline, and law enforcement. Establish a closed-loop mechanism for promoting reform and rectification through case studies. In response to the issues exposed in the case, the Discipline Inspection Commission and Supervision Commission of Haimen District, Nantong City, Jiangsu Province, has reported to Jiangsu Changjiang Estuary Development Group Co., Ltd