The classification screen

4 questions before you choose the route.

This page identifies the right question and evidence. It does not determine the legal outcome on a reader’s facts.

01

Diverted or taken?

Theory choice.

Theory
02

Was there authorisation?

Board/treasury.

Authority
03

Personal use shown how?

Bank trail.

Use
04

Amount and duration?

Statutory factors.

Scale

Working rule: Criminal Law misappropriation-of-funds provisions target personnel who divert unit funds for personal use in ways the statute covers.

What changes the answer

The signal ledger.

These facts move the question beyond a label and into a product, money-flow and control analysis.

Signal
Ask the operating question
Why it changes the route
Embezzlement and misappropriation used as synonyms
Charging confusion.
Split pages.
Silent repayment as the only plan
May not cure the file.
Counsel.
Skip accounting evidence reality
Books become exhibits.
Deep blogs.
Prepare before you escalate

Bring a compact evidence docket—not a pitch deck.

Give a compliance team or counsel the operating facts that reveal the perimeter.

01Bank and ERP trailMovement of funds.
02Authorisation minutesIf any.
03Role documentsWho could move money.
Common confusions

Questions people ask before they build.

Short answers for orientation. The right result can change with the service model and current rules.

If we repay, is it over?

Repayment may mitigate but does not automatically erase criminal exposure. Fact-specific.

Where do books become criminal evidence?

See related tax/financial-crime evidence narratives — link,.

Primary authorities

Reviewed sources support orientation, not a fact-specific assessment.

PRC Criminal Procedure Law (NPC)
PRC Criminal Law (NPC)
Supreme People’s Procuratorate
Ministry of Public Security