Lead

In March 2026, Pang Zhenhuan, a partner at Beijing Zhonglun Wende Law Firm, was selected for the "2025 Annual Top 40 Elite Lawyers" by Lvxin News. Holding dual master's degrees in economics and criminal law, he previously worked in Beijing's procuratorial organs for years, handling arrest approvals, public prosecutions, and investigations of duty-related crimes. After transitioning careers, he has provided legal services to more than 30 large state-owned enterprises, central enterprises, and listed companies. His approach to handling cases is

As criminal defense has entered a stage of professional competition characterized by deep understanding and precise application of judicial operational logic, Pang Zhenhuan's dual prosecution-defense thinking provides a model worthy of reference for the industry. This article will analyze, from a lawyer's perspective, how this way of thinking functions in actual cases and explore its legal implications for ordinary citizens and businesses.

Dual Prosecution-Defense Thinking: Reverse-Deconstructing Prosecution Evidence from an Investigative Perspective

Pang Zhenhuan's six years at the procuratorate gave him a rare dual internalization of "investigative thinking" and "trial perspective." He admitted that he was accustomed to deconstructing the prosecution's evidence system in reverse, from the angle of how evidence is constructed during investigation. His experience in investigating duty-related crimes gave him a deep understanding of how a case is built "from zero to one," where the weakest links in the evidence chain lie, and which confessions may have flaws in evidence collection.

What does this mindset mean in practice? In simple terms, it is "know the enemy and know yourself." Traditional defense lawyers often start from reviewing the case files and passively respond to the prosecution's accusations; Pang Zhenhuan, however, can put himself in the prosecutor's shoes and anticipate their logic of accusation, rhythm of evidence presentation, and focus of argumentation. When formulating a defense strategy, he can precisely identify the weakest points of evidentiary contradiction in the prosecution's case, achieving effective confrontation rather than talking past the issues.

From a legal practice perspective, the methodology behind this lies in the requirement of Article 55 of the Criminal Procedure Law regarding the standard of "reliable and sufficient evidence." If defense lawyers can understand the process by which the prosecution constructs evidence, they can more effectively examine the objectivity, relevance, and legality of the evidence. Especially in duty-related crime cases, there are often gaps in the chain connecting confessions, documentary evidence, and electronic data—and this is precisely where the space for defense lies.

For ordinary lawyers, this way of thinking is not unattainable. The key lies in cultivating the ability to "put oneself in others' shoes"—imagining if one were the prosecutor, how would one organize evidence and argue the elements of a crime? Such training can significantly enhance the targeting and effectiveness of defense work.

The procedural argument and the evidentiary argument: not a choice, but a combination punch.

In the field of criminal defense, there has long been a debate between the "procedural defense" and the "evidentiary defense." Pang Zhenhuan's view is clear: the two are not separate but complementary, with the "evidentiary defense" serving as the substantive goal and the "procedural defense" as the offensive weapon.

He shared a typical case: in a bribery case, he applied for exclusion of illegally obtained evidence and obtained the synchronized audio and video recordings, discovering that the transcript was seriously inconsistent with the recording. Based on Article 56 of the Criminal Procedure Law regarding the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence, he successfully excluded the key confession, causing the entire chain of charges to break, and ultimately achieved the desired defense effect.

This case reveals a core strategy: undermining key prosecution evidence through precise "procedural arguments," thereby achieving a root-and-branch "evidence-based defense." If a purely "procedural argument" fails to shake the core evidence, it amounts only to a procedural victory; conversely, an "evidence-based defense" divorced from procedural considerations often cannot reach the foundation of the prosecution's evidence.

In practice, lawyers should be adept at utilizing the provisions on the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence in Articles 54 to 58 of the Criminal Procedure Law, as well as the detailed rules on evidence review in the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China. Particularly after the reform of the supervision system, the review of evidence in duty crime cases has become more complex, and lawyers need to find breakthroughs in areas such as evidence collection procedures, synchronous audio-video recordings, and the legality of interrogations.

For the litigant, it is important to understand this: a lawyer's defense strategy is not a single-dimensional confrontation, but a multi-dimensional systematic endeavor. When choosing a lawyer, one should pay attention to whether they possess the ability to comprehensively apply procedural and substantive rules.

Defense Difficulties and Breakthrough Points in Criminal-Civil Cross Cases

Financial and economic crimes and cases involving the overlap of criminal and civil law are Pang Zhenhuan's areas of expertise. The difficulty in such cases lies in the "ambiguous definition of legal relationships" and the "professional barriers in evidence." The same act or the same flow of funds often triggers both civil legal norms and criminal legal norms simultaneously, making it difficult to clearly determine whether it constitutes a civil breach of contract, a tort, or a criminal offense.

Pang Zhenhuan pointed out that such cases often conceal illegal activities under the guise of legitimate business, with the boundaries between civil fraud and criminal fraud, and between regulatory violations and crimes, being extremely blurred. The massive volumes of electronic data, financial account books, and transaction records create evidence barriers, placing extremely high demands on lawyers' composite knowledge structure.

He has two breakthrough points: first, deconstructing criminal charges with financial logic. For example, in insider trading cases, he uses financial expertise to prove that the information did not meet the "materiality" standard, or that the trade was based on a pre-established quantitative model, thereby blocking the presumption of "use" and "knowledge." Second, anchoring the determination of criminal illegality with civil legality. Many criminal cases are built on administrative violations or civil breaches; if the preceding law permits such conduct, criminal illegality ceases to exist. He focuses on whether the conduct in question is permitted under the Contract Part of the Civil Code and the Company Law, removing the foundation at its source.

Whether the performance of a bet-on agreement constitutes commercial risk or contract fraud often hangs by a thread. Pang Zhenhuan's experience is that lawyers must deeply understand commercial logic rather than simply apply criminal law provisions. This also explains why he has an economics background and securities and futures qualifications—in complex cases, interdisciplinary knowledge directly determines the quality of defense.

For entrepreneurs, this part deserves special attention. When signing valuation adjustment mechanism agreements or conducting investment and financing activities, they should consult professional lawyers in advance to assess the criminal risk boundaries of their actions. Once caught in criminal-civil cross-disputes, engaging lawyers with interdisciplinary backgrounds as early as possible often leads to more favorable outcomes.

White-Collar Crime Defense: Proactive Defense and Precise Severance

Pang Zhenhuan has handled a large number of white-collar crime cases, including embezzlement, bribery involving non-state personnel, and contract fraud. The parties in such cases generally have high cultural literacy and sensitive social identities; their core demands are not only acquittal or lenient sentencing, but also, to the greatest extent, preserving their personal dignity and commercial reputation.

His core expertise is "defense前置，integrated offense and defense." The optimal intervention timing is before case filing. Once he receives a consultation or learns of a preliminary investigation, he immediately assembles a professional team to conduct a "legal physical examination" from both the prosecution and defense perspectives. In several cases, during the supervisory investigation or public security preliminary investigation stage, by submitting detailed legal opinions and evidentiary materials demonstrating that no crime had occurred or that the circumstances were clearly minor, he ultimately prevented the clients from being transferred for prosecution.

Another key point is "precise positioning and rapid cutting." The determination of the amount involved is the core of such cases. Lawyers should make every effort at the earliest opportunity to sort out the flow of funds and accounting records, making a clear cut between personal property and company property, as well as personal consumption and official consumption, so as to strive to significantly reduce the alleged amount during the review and prosecution stage.

At the same time, taking into account circumstances such as the party being a first-time offender, an occasional offender, actively returning stolen goods and making restitution, and repairing social relations, fully negotiate with the prosecutor within the framework of pleading guilty and accepting punishment. In accordance with the provisions of Article 15

For corporate managers, this section offers two key takeaways: First, establish an internal anti-corruption mechanism to avoid commingling personal conduct with company assets; Second, once faced with an investigation, promptly seek support from professional lawyers and never attempt to handle it on your own or delay.

Enterprise criminal risk prevention: From "firefighting" to "fire prevention"

Data shows that in 2025, procuratorial organs nationwide prosecuted 137,000 individuals for crimes disrupting the order of the socialist market economy, a year-on-year increase of 13%; prosecutions for internal corruption in private enterprises reached 3,298, also growing year-on-year. The number of criminal cases involving A-share listed companies has risen for three consecutive years, with a total of 93 A-share listed companies embroiled in criminal incidents throughout 2025. The high incidence of corporate criminal risks made Pang Zhenhuan realize that lawyers must not only be able to put out fires, but also help companies design governance structures that are less prone to catching fire in the first place.

Leveraging his experience in non-litigation projects, Pang Zhenhuan embeds a compliance-first mindset into the key nodes of corporate operations. He has provided legal services to multiple state-owned and central enterprises, with deep involvement in asset securitization and private fund projects. In his view, criminal lawyers often see only a single "risk point" in a company, whereas his non-litigation background enables him to understand the "lifeline" and "vascular system" of a business model. He is committed to delivering legal solutions that "do not disrupt transactions while effectively isolating risks," rather than simply saying "no."

For example, when designing private fund structures, he would avoid the criminal red lines of "capital pooling" and "self-financing" from the front end; in corporate mergers and acquisitions, he would proactively investigate the target company's potential criminal risks. This "fire prevention" style of service is based on the provisions of Article 176 of the Criminal Law (crime of illegally absorbing public deposits),

For enterprises, preventing criminal risks is far more important than responding after the fact. It is recommended that companies conduct regular "legal health checks," especially at key junctures such as equity changes, financing, and the signing of major contracts, by bringing in professional lawyers for compliance review. This is not only a legal requirement but also a reflection of business wisdom.

Conclusion

Pang Zhenhuan's professional trajectory reveals a trend: criminal defense has evolved from mere courtroom confrontation into a deep understanding and precise application of the logic of judicial operations. The value of dual prosecution-defense thinking lies in its transcendence of the binary opposition between "right" and "wrong," pursuing instead the "optimal solution" for clients in complex cases.

For ordinary people, understanding this way of thinking helps them view criminal justice procedures more rationally and recognize the unique value of lawyers in upholding procedural justice and substantive fairness. For businesses, criminal risk prevention and control should become part of the governance structure, rather than an afterthought remedy.

Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm specializes in criminal defense and cross-disciplinary criminal-civil cases, bringing together a team of versatile lawyers with backgrounds in judicial authorities. The firm is committed to providing legal services that are "compassionate, strategic, and effective." If you or your business are facing related legal challenges, we welcome your consultation. We will leverage our professional expertise to secure the best possible outcome for you.