Empirical Study on the Judicial Dilemma of “Serious Circumstances” in Money Laundering Crimes

《最高人民法院、最高人民检察院关于办理洗钱刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》(以下简称《2024洗钱解释》)第四条确立了洗钱罪“情节严重”“3 (具体标准) + 1 (兜底标准)”认定框架。通过解构“情节严重”综合认定理论，揭示洗钱罪的特殊性在于其承上启下的多重法益侵害性——既破坏金融管理秩序又妨害司法活动及金融安全。基于243份裁判文书的实证分析表明：司法实践存在司法解释适用率仅2%、仅通过数额认定“情节严重”案件的占25%、同案不同判及多元情节忽视四大困境。研究强调需突破“数额中心主义”，将跨境洗钱、虚拟交易等技术性手段纳入评价体系，为构建精细化认定标准提供理论支撑。The “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Money Laundering” (hereinafter referred to as the “2024 Money Laundering Interpretation”) establishes a “3 (specific standards) + 1 (catch-all standard)” framework for determining “serious circumstances” in money laundering crimes in Article 4. By deconstructing the comprehensive determination theory of “serious circumstances”, it reveals that the particularity of money laundering crimes lies in its dual infringement of legal interests - disrupting financial management order and obstructing judicial activities. An empirical analysis based on 243 judicial documents shows that there are four major dilemmas in judicial practice: The application rate of judicial interpretations is only 2%, 25% of cases determine “serious circumstances” solely based on the amount, inconsistent judgments in similar cases, and neglect of multiple circumstances. The research emphasizes the need to break away from the “amount-centered approach”, incorporate technical means such as cross-border money laundering and virtual transactions into the evaluation system, and provide theoretical support for the construction of refined determination standards.