[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"public-home":3,"news-detail-professional-665":403},{"entity":4,"seo":355},{"siteConfig":5,"banners":28,"branches":48,"honors":81,"cases":113,"caseTypes":197,"caseIntro":230,"latestLawyerNews":231,"lawyerNews":246,"lawyerNewsMonthCount":299,"serviceTags":300,"serviceCategories":301,"subSlogan":12,"serviceIntro":331,"homeStats":332,"serviceProducts":345},{"id":6,"siteName":7,"siteDomain":8,"logoUrl":9,"faviconUrl":10,"slogan":11,"subSlogan":12,"aboutSummary":13,"aboutImage":14,"teamPhotoUrl":15,"hotline":16,"email":10,"headquartersAddress":17,"headquartersLng":18,"headquartersLat":19,"foundingYear":20,"creditCode":10,"sameAs":10,"wechatQrcode":21,"videoQrcode":22,"douyinQrcode":23,"xiaohongshuQrcode":24,"icpNumber":25,"psbNumber":26,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":27},1,"四川卓安律师事务所","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002F083753d8-b587-4105-a0e2-9da8eacdcfd5.png",null,"为生命辩护，为自由辩护","一家专注刑事，走「专门」路线的律师所","卓安律师事务所由执业近30年的成安博士于2013年发起设立，是全国最早一批专注刑事的刑事专业律师事务所之一。一心一意，只做刑事，不做综合所，不接非刑事业务。以专业化、精品化、一体化运营为全国客户提供刑事辩护、刑事控告、企业刑事合规与风险防控法律服务。","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002Fffef6a8d-e19d-44df-a8f1-08ece0042bd7.jpg","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002F87a0be21-3874-4f87-8586-63a62fd10a31.jpg","4000-148-149","四川省成都高新区天府二街蜀都中心1号楼19楼1902-1904室",104.06749,30.5524575,"2003","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002Fb86da287-bc41-4285-aa3c-0602065190d2.jpg","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002F77233542-14b7-4884-a78f-8c0d531d096d.png","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002F616aa748-5454-49dd-a09d-a73925d672fe.png","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002F4b5bc9ea-d513-4287-8aca-0a589e539381.png","蜀ICP备2026035071号-1","川公网安备51019002009895号","2026-06-22 21:30:32",[29,34,39,42,45],{"id":6,"createdAt":30,"updatedAt":30,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":33,"linkUrl":32,"sort":6,"status":6},"2026-06-22 21:33:46",0,"","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002Ff8e758a5-0784-4769-aa52-97ec64cc1216.jpg",{"id":35,"createdAt":36,"updatedAt":36,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":37,"linkUrl":32,"sort":38,"status":6},3,"2026-07-14 14:39:20","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002F557b3e37-70b1-4aa8-88d6-9a07b61969b1.png",2,{"id":40,"createdAt":30,"updatedAt":30,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":41,"linkUrl":32,"sort":35,"status":6},5,"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002F7512d49c-e31a-4bd1-a436-00de2d2d960f.png",{"id":43,"createdAt":30,"updatedAt":30,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":44,"linkUrl":32,"sort":43,"status":6},4,"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002F27e2b0bf-cf18-4dd0-bb77-5853e0673a1b.png",{"id":38,"createdAt":46,"updatedAt":46,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":47,"linkUrl":32,"sort":40,"status":6},"2026-07-14 14:39:06","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002F3c8f1908-114d-44bf-9e33-2818d8bfce89.png",[49,55,60,65,70,75],{"id":35,"createdAt":50,"updatedAt":51,"deleted":31,"code":52,"name":53,"address":17,"phone":16,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":54,"status":6},"2026-06-16 13:55:38","2026-08-24 21:29:48","chengdu","成都总所",-1,{"id":6,"createdAt":56,"updatedAt":56,"deleted":31,"code":57,"name":58,"address":59,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-22 21:46:09","kunming","昆明","云南省昆明市五华区和谐广场和谐B座第49层4909室",{"id":38,"createdAt":61,"updatedAt":61,"deleted":31,"code":62,"name":63,"address":64,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-22 21:46:31","shenzheng","深圳","广东省深圳市龙华区民塘路328号龙华区数字创新中心A座14层04、05号",{"id":43,"createdAt":66,"updatedAt":66,"deleted":31,"code":67,"name":68,"address":69,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-26 13:55:59","chongqing","重庆","重庆市渝北区湖山路虹陶大厦22层13-17号",{"id":40,"createdAt":71,"updatedAt":71,"deleted":31,"code":72,"name":73,"address":74,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-26 13:56:12","dazhou","达州","四川省达州市通川区永兴路146号恒基大厦二楼",{"id":76,"createdAt":77,"updatedAt":77,"deleted":31,"code":78,"name":79,"address":80,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},6,"2026-06-26 13:56:31","xining","西宁","青海省西宁市城东区南山东路创新创业大厦A座15楼",[82,88,94,100,105,109],{"id":6,"createdAt":83,"updatedAt":83,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":84,"thumbnail":85,"content":10,"publishTime":86,"sort":87,"status":6},"2026-06-26 14:01:11","四川卓安律师事务所党支部—“四川省律师行业党建标准化律师事务所党组织”","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F26\u002F15b73500-33d0-4eae-ae82-192e3f44d1c3.jpg","2026-07-27 21:53:52",-3,{"id":38,"createdAt":89,"updatedAt":89,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":90,"thumbnail":91,"content":10,"publishTime":92,"sort":93,"status":6},"2026-06-28 22:22:47","四川卓安律师事务所——\"四川省律师行业文化名所\"","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F26\u002F3e628c5a-4df8-42d2-8667-d107a295f786.jpg","2026-08-26 17:05:47",-2,{"id":95,"createdAt":96,"updatedAt":96,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":97,"thumbnail":98,"content":10,"publishTime":99,"sort":54,"status":6},24,"2026-09-01 14:02:47","“司法云庭荟”法律职业共同体线上交流平台建设的全新创新做法入选最高人民检察院政治部《全国检察机关教育培训创新100例》","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F09\u002F01\u002F03c5415b-2799-4097-8c6b-95a6089d5a3c.jpg","2026-09-01 14:01:51",{"id":35,"createdAt":101,"updatedAt":101,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":102,"thumbnail":103,"content":10,"publishTime":104,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-28 22:23:01","成安律师被评为“成都市优秀律师”","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F26\u002Fdae82b8c-327b-437e-8c37-bc241a6bf780.jpg","2026-08-26 17:07:20",{"id":43,"createdAt":101,"updatedAt":101,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":106,"thumbnail":107,"content":10,"publishTime":108,"sort":31,"status":6},"成安律师被聘请为“成都市人民政府第一届行政复议委员会委员”","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F27\u002F92313a8b-8b6e-4cff-9c80-ec82331e9bc0.jpg","2026-08-27 14:01:26",{"id":40,"createdAt":101,"updatedAt":101,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":110,"thumbnail":111,"content":10,"publishTime":112,"sort":31,"status":6},"成安律师被聘请为“日知公益学习社团青年刑辩人才计划特聘导师”","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F27\u002Fb8c6c1f9-16e5-4f16-b3c3-a8833b9d4275.jpg","2026-08-27 14:03:31",[114,121,128,132,139,147,152,157,162,167,172,179,184,188,192],{"id":115,"title":116,"thumbnail":117,"summary":118,"caseTypeId":40,"caseTypeName":119,"caseTypeCode":120},679,"X某涉嫌毒品犯罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，获减少罪名认定","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002Ff48b1248-9e8e-4e41-9878-594db86d4c37.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名： 贩卖、 制造毒品罪 ， 非法持有毒品罪 ， 容留他人吸毒罪 结果： 法院采纳部分辩护意见， 主犯死刑 改判死缓，三名 从犯 获大幅减刑 亮点： 成功推翻非法持有毒品罪指控，减少罪名认定 揭示关键物证","毒品犯罪优秀案例","drug_crime",{"id":122,"title":123,"thumbnail":124,"summary":125,"caseTypeId":43,"caseTypeName":126,"caseTypeCode":127},678,"Z某涉嫌单位行贿罪、串通招投标罪，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获缓刑","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002Fac43f3a8-ed7b-4975-848a-06cd1b6528a5.png","【案情简述】 2019年至 2021年期间，某科技股份有限公司法定代表人Z某为感谢时任石嘴山市某局党组书记、局长F某(已判决)在某科技股份有限公司承揽石嘴山市某监管项目、污染源企业全过程监管项目(一期和二期)及工程款拨付等方面提供的帮助，以","经济犯罪优秀案例","economic_crime",{"id":129,"title":130,"thumbnail":10,"summary":131,"caseTypeId":43,"caseTypeName":126,"caseTypeCode":127},677,"D某涉嫌串通投标罪，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，成功取保候审","一、【案情简述】 嫌疑人D某于14年至18年期间在成都某建筑公司担任业务员，主要工作内容为代表公司与相关招标代理人、实际施工人等沟通、拉业务同时代表公司参与各建设项目的招投标工作，并代公司收取相应的借用资质费、招投标资料费等费用。2021年",{"id":133,"title":134,"thumbnail":135,"summary":136,"caseTypeId":35,"caseTypeName":137,"caseTypeCode":138},676,"H某涉嫌参加黑社会性质组织等罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师成功辩护，获减轻处罚","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002Fedab7283-e35c-409b-8122-2c6c9fe1283e.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：参加黑社会性质组织罪（变更涉恶）、寻衅滋事罪、非法拘禁罪、敲诈勒索罪 结果： · 成功将“黑社会性质组织罪”变更为“恶势力犯罪集团”； · 敲诈勒索罪、非法拘禁罪指控被法院驳回； · 寻衅滋事罪仅认定","涉黑涉恶优秀案例","gang_crime",{"id":140,"title":141,"thumbnail":142,"summary":143,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},675,"F某涉嫌帮助信息网络罪，四川卓安律事务所律师团队为其辩护，撤销案件","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F4b71eb76-73b9-4634-8468-3b4fdc258de4.png","【案情简述】 当事人涉嫌帮信罪被移送审查起诉，家属到律所委托代理，办案律师担任当事人审查起诉阶段的辩护人。 【办案过程】 受委托人的委托，办案律师多次会见当事人，在会见时详细的了解了案情概况，梳理了案件脉络，并对委托人就当事人近况进行了简短",7,"网络新型犯罪优秀案例","cyber_crime",{"id":148,"title":149,"thumbnail":150,"summary":151,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},674,"Z某涉嫌帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪一案,四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获取保候审","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F4bc54bd5-530f-4571-bb91-b1764056f10c.png","一、案情简介 2021年7月，嫌疑人Z某接到其朋友Y某电话，声称想借用其银行卡过几笔钱用于购买比特币，同时可以给予其一些报酬。Z某因碍于朋友情面且因可以获得一些报酬于是就爽快答应了朋友Y某的请求。随后其朋友Y某利用Z某的银行账户、手机银行等",{"id":153,"title":154,"thumbnail":155,"summary":156,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},673,"Z某某帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所团队律师辩护，获得轻判","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F6a14490f-6000-4231-b1bc-b6b7e49896e1.png","一、【案情简述】 检察机关指控：2021年至2022年期间，F某（已判）从事虚假几份兑换商城，委托被告人z某某提供技术。T某于2021年9月开始加如与F某某共同经营。经营模式：由Z某某架设一个虚假积分商城，F某某T某通过联系短信运营商群发虚",{"id":158,"title":159,"thumbnail":160,"summary":161,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},672,"X某涉嫌帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，获从轻处罚","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F7cb8848d-9acb-4179-bb2d-9d97da88c122.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪 结果：判处有期徒刑九个月（已扣除先行羁押6日），罚金五千元。 亮点： 1. 成功认定自首情节，依法从轻处罚 2. 通过详实的证据链反驳“主观明知”推定，避免更重量刑 3. 针对",{"id":163,"title":164,"thumbnail":165,"summary":166,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},671,"Ｈ某涉嫌帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获不批捕并取保候审","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F71406e62-2a27-46bb-b2da-b2d62c69d2c4.png","一、案情简介 H某在其浙江老家，当地一直有许多沿海一带的人来收购电话卡、银行卡等。H某一位成都的朋友正好在做倒卖公司公账银行卡的生意，因此希望H某帮其寻找买家。H某遂帮其牵线，介绍了一位姓名不详的江浙人给其成都的朋友，并帮忙将交易价款转给成",{"id":168,"title":169,"thumbnail":170,"summary":171,"caseTypeId":43,"caseTypeName":126,"caseTypeCode":127},670,"M某涉嫌组织、领导传销活动罪，四川卓安律所钟灵柔律师为其辩护，在批准逮捕后最终获得适用缓刑的量刑建议并取保候审","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002Fdda305e0-6546-4f71-9536-2bef2b87fbf4.png","一、案情简介 涉及上亿资金的虚拟币投资平台，M某因涉嫌组织、领导传销活动罪被检察院批准逮捕。 二、办案过程 承办律师在接受当事人家属委托之后，立即前往办案单位递交委托手续并开展会见工作，客观公正地分析了案件情况。同时承办律师与承办人就案件存",{"id":173,"title":174,"thumbnail":175,"summary":176,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},669,"W某涉嫌贪污罪，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获轻判","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F59efab79-758e-4ba5-8c49-a30e75e5d97d.png","一、【案情简述】 2019 年4月，被告人S某通过朋友介绍认识了被告人Z某，S某以能源集团收购加油站负责人的身份，提出能源集团收购J加油站的意向，并提出如收购完成，能源集团领导将从套取的资金中收取好处费人民币 500万元(以下未标明币种的均","职务犯罪优秀案例","duty_crime",{"id":180,"title":181,"thumbnail":182,"summary":183,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},668,"X某涉嫌贪污罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，获从轻处罚","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F23\u002Fb40331c5-0aeb-4e4d-bce7-3e6dee0fe939.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：贪污罪 结果：被告人X某（原医保局审核股股长）被判处有期徒刑三年六个月，罚金二十万元。 亮点： 1. 成功将被告人定性为 从犯 ，减轻处罚 2. 排除部分涉案金额（证言中的两笔资金未被认定） 3. 全",{"id":185,"title":186,"thumbnail":10,"summary":187,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},667,"周某某涉嫌贪污罪、受贿罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，成功核减犯罪数额并获从宽量刑","一、案件受贿罪结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：贪污罪、受贿罪 结果：数罪并罚判处有期徒刑18年，罚金530万元（起诉指控贪污7099.5482万元，辩护后法院采纳部分意见核减数额）。 亮点： 1. 成功论证部分阶段不构成贪污罪主体资格，核减",{"id":189,"title":190,"thumbnail":10,"summary":191,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},666,"L某涉嫌贪污罪、受贿罪、巨额财产来源不明罪，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获轻判","律师工作： 阅卷阅卷，不停的阅卷 案件焦点： 案件程序问题：本案监委是否有管辖职权； 犯罪数额计算，这些数字对不对 案件结果： 做到了每个罪名的法定最低档量刑了 1.犯 贪污罪 ，判处 有期徒刑 一年，并处十 罚金 万元; 2.犯 受贿罪 ",{"id":193,"title":194,"thumbnail":195,"summary":196,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},665,"陈某涉嫌贪污罪二审改判一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，刑期由13年改判为11年","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F23\u002F3afa7596-457f-43b0-93e2-8c05f101c723.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：贪污罪（二审改判） 结果：刑期由13年改判为11年，罚金100万元维持 亮点： 成功挑战贪污罪定性争议，推动法院对\"公共财产\"性质进行专项审查 通过精细化数额计算辩护，核减指控金额达76%（1353万",[198,201,204,207,210,215,218,224],{"id":38,"code":178,"name":177,"summary":199,"keywords":200},"覆盖贪污罪、受贿罪、行贿罪、挪用公款罪、滥用职权罪、玩忽职守罪等。","监察留置｜公职人员辩护｜数额认定",{"id":35,"code":138,"name":137,"summary":202,"keywords":203},"覆盖组织、领导、参加黑社会性质组织罪，以及寻衅滋事、敲诈勒索、聚众斗殴等。","黑恶性质认定｜组织层级｜罪数认定",{"id":43,"code":127,"name":126,"summary":205,"keywords":206},"覆盖诈骗罪、合同诈骗罪、非法吸收公众存款罪、非法经营罪、虚开增值税专用发票罪等。","企业家辩护｜涉案金额｜刑民交叉",{"id":40,"code":120,"name":119,"summary":208,"keywords":209},"覆盖走私、贩卖、运输、制造毒品罪，非法持有毒品罪及制毒物品犯罪。","毒品数量认定｜主观明知｜死刑辩护",{"id":76,"code":211,"name":212,"summary":213,"keywords":214},"property_crime","财产犯罪优秀案例","覆盖盗窃罪、抢劫罪、诈骗罪、敲诈勒索罪、职务侵占罪、挪用资金罪等。","非法占有目的｜涉案金额｜退赔谅解",{"id":144,"code":146,"name":145,"summary":216,"keywords":217},"覆盖帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪、电信网络诈骗、侵犯公民个人信息罪、开设赌场罪等。\n","电子数据审查｜主观明知｜资金流水",{"id":219,"code":220,"name":221,"summary":222,"keywords":223},8,"corporate_compliance","性犯罪优秀案例","覆盖强奸罪、强制猥亵罪、猥亵儿童罪、组织卖淫罪、传播淫秽物品罪等。\n","言词证据｜未成年人案件｜隐私保护",{"id":225,"code":226,"name":227,"summary":228,"keywords":229},9,"criminal_complaint","人身权利犯罪优秀案例","覆盖故意杀人罪、故意伤害罪、非法拘禁罪、绑架罪、过失致人死亡罪等。","正当防卫｜因果关系｜伤情鉴定","多年来，卓安专注刑事领域，累计办理刑事案件8000余件，依法为当事人争取无罪、取保候审、缓刑、不起诉、从轻及减轻处罚等结果。",{"id":232,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":234,"city":235,"caseType":236,"title":237,"thumbnail":238,"content":10,"publishTime":239,"sort":10,"status":10,"lawyerNames":240,"lawyers":241,"lawyer":245},790,"2026-10-13 13:51:35",78,"白山中院+吉林省看守所","受贿罪","2026年10月12、13日 彭栖伟 受贿罪——卓安（重庆）律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002Faeff63f5-4734-44b5-83fc-4fe483db46a8.png","2026-10-13 14:12:39","彭栖伟",[242],{"id":234,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":240,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":244,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"专职律师","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F18\u002Fe7e138d0-374e-40f4-8a64-17f2eaa16ca6.jpg",{"id":234,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":240,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":244,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},[247,250,263,275,287],{"id":232,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":234,"city":235,"caseType":236,"title":237,"thumbnail":238,"content":10,"publishTime":239,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":240,"lawyers":248},[249],{"id":234,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":240,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":244,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},{"id":251,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":252,"city":253,"caseType":254,"title":255,"thumbnail":256,"content":10,"publishTime":257,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":258,"lawyers":259},789,43,"宣汉县看守所","诈骗罪","2026年10月13日 晏建强 诈骗罪——卓安律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002F9784a2ad-b503-4c72-8998-7d785f08998c.png","2026-10-13 14:11:53","晏建强",[260],{"id":252,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":258,"position":261,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":262,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"刑事四部 部长","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F18\u002Fab5ccf97-3ef1-4db5-a101-a5f001ec2350.jpg",{"id":264,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":265,"city":266,"caseType":267,"title":268,"thumbnail":269,"content":10,"publishTime":270,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":271,"lawyers":272},788,84,"重庆永川区看守所+永川区检察院","寻衅滋事罪","2026年10月12日 罗杨 寻衅滋事罪——卓安（重庆）律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002F3df2920f-f2e5-4b8d-ae33-50efa7329c5d.png","2026-10-12 13:59:59","罗杨",[273],{"id":265,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":271,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":274,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F20\u002F71393bb0-30d8-4028-ad17-529bfa81f91d.jpg",{"id":276,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":277,"city":278,"caseType":279,"title":280,"thumbnail":281,"content":10,"publishTime":282,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":283,"lawyers":284},787,98,"深圳市宝安区看守所","非法经营罪","2026年10月12日 彭乐程 非法经营罪——卓安（深圳）律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002Fd8cbbe6b-17e3-472d-8660-19788cf7258d.png","2026-10-12 13:59:15","彭乐程",[285],{"id":277,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":283,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":286,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F09\u002F09\u002F3e3833d3-0396-48d7-9b5f-7729393a0976.jpg",{"id":288,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":289,"city":290,"caseType":291,"title":292,"thumbnail":293,"content":10,"publishTime":294,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":295,"lawyers":296},786,10,"深圳市罗湖区人民检察院","猥亵儿童罪","2026年10月12日 陈志伟 猥亵儿童罪——卓安（深圳）律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002F8b14a2f4-88d1-4d09-a2e1-385982107474.png","2026-10-12 13:58:30","陈志伟",[297],{"id":289,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":295,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":298,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002Fd8b580fc-0c38-493a-aa21-2e3b581a7b9e.png",40,[],[302,307,312,317,322,327],{"id":40,"createdAt":303,"updatedAt":304,"deleted":31,"code":305,"name":306,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":32,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-08-17 10:39:04","2026-10-13 16:28:19","XINGSHIHEGUI","服务品质",{"id":6,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":308,"deleted":31,"code":309,"name":310,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":311,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":6,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:28:13","criminal","服务范围","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002Fca98263c-68cd-4768-8c9e-ccc0086eade9.jpg",{"id":38,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":313,"deleted":31,"code":314,"name":315,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":316,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":38,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:29:23","key_crime","服务方式","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002F5df41c7a-813a-48db-8eb7-057f5019ab32.jpg",{"id":35,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":318,"deleted":31,"code":319,"name":320,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":321,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":35,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:29:52","corporate","服务流程","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002F40c30169-fc75-40bc-a144-8f9b4261f108.jpg",{"id":144,"createdAt":323,"updatedAt":324,"deleted":31,"code":325,"name":326,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":32,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":43,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:30:32","2026-10-13 16:30:42","fuwutiyan","服务体验",{"id":219,"createdAt":328,"updatedAt":328,"deleted":31,"code":329,"name":330,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":32,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":40,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:31:42","fuwushoufei","服务收费原则","卓安以刑事专业能力为企业提供风险识别、合规治理、专项培训与危机处置支持，帮助企业在复杂经营环境中守住法律底线。",[333,336,339,342],{"value":334,"label":335},"8000+","成功案例",{"value":337,"label":338},"600+","锦旗感谢",{"value":340,"label":341},"100+","法律服务产品",{"value":343,"label":344},"6","全国分所",[346,349,352],{"title":347,"desc":348},"刑事诉讼类服务","律师会见、法律咨询、专家论证、案件指导\u002F协作、立案\u002F取保\u002F不起诉\u002F无罪\u002F罪轻等全阶段辩护。",{"title":350,"desc":351},"刑事风控类服务","风控计划、风控评估、执法调查应对、企业全生命周期刑事风控与重点行业\u002F领域风控。",{"title":353,"desc":354},"刑事普法类服务","政策宣讲、知识付费、轻法服务（线上咨询、文书范本、解决方案）等上百项精准化产品。",{"title":356,"description":13,"keywords":357,"canonical":358,"image":10,"jsonLd":359},"四川卓安律师事务所 - 专注刑事辩护的专业律所","刑事辩护,律师事务所,四川卓安","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F",[360],{"@context":361,"@graph":362},"https:\u002F\u002Fschema.org",[363,369],{"@type":364,"@id":365,"url":358,"name":7,"inLanguage":366,"publisher":367},"WebSite","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#website","zh-CN",{"@id":368},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#organization",{"@type":370,"@id":368,"name":7,"url":358,"logo":371,"image":371,"description":13,"telephone":16,"email":10,"foundingDate":20,"taxID":10,"inLanguage":366,"address":372,"geo":375,"department":377},"LegalService","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002F083753d8-b587-4105-a0e2-9da8eacdcfd5.png",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":17,"addressCountry":374},"PostalAddress","CN",{"@type":376,"latitude":19,"longitude":18},"GeoCoordinates",[378,383,387,391,395,399],{"@type":379,"@id":380,"name":53,"image":10,"telephone":16,"address":381,"parentOrganization":382},"LocalBusiness","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-chengdu",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":17},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":384,"name":58,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":385,"parentOrganization":386},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-kunming",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":59},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":388,"name":63,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":389,"parentOrganization":390},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-shenzheng",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":64},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":392,"name":68,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":393,"parentOrganization":394},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-chongqing",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":69},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":396,"name":73,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":397,"parentOrganization":398},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-dazhou",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":74},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":400,"name":79,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":401,"parentOrganization":402},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-xining",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":80},{"@id":368},{"entity":404,"seo":414},{"id":193,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":405,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":32,"seoDescription":32,"seoKeywords":32,"schemaExtra":10,"typeId":43,"title":406,"thumbnail":407,"content":408,"publishTime":409,"sort":10,"status":10,"newsType":410},"2026-09-24 10:14:34","家人在棋牌室组牌局被定开设赌场罪，与赌博罪到底怎么区分？","https:\u002F\u002Ffile.tinglifangs.com\u002Fpro\u002Fother\u002F1790215896793.png","\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">开设赌场罪与赌博罪的四个区分维度，与被指控之后的六个辩点\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">卓安律师事务所·涉黑涉恶犯罪专业委员会出品\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">发布时间：2026年9月24日\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cimg src=\"https:\u002F\u002Ffile.tinglifangs.com\u002Fpro\u002Fother\u002F1790215896793.png\" alt=\"\" data-href=\"\" style=\"\">\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>【摘要】\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">棋牌室组牌局被指控开设赌场，家属最不能接受的是场地、客人、钱都是别人的，怎么就成了开赌场。这个疑问指向本罪与赌博罪的分界：两罪都表现为提供场所、赌具并获利，量刑却差一档，开设赌场罪起点是五年以下，赌博罪顶格三年。分界点在于有没有形成经营性的赌博平台，即组织性、经营性、控制性与规模性，以及参赌人员是否不特定多数人。总第 58 辑给出的规模、场所、时间、公开性、召集方式、是否参赌六条标准，至今是最常用的对照工具；人民法院案例库入库的棋牌室案从另一端收紧，台费与本地同类经营相当、未从组织管理中直接渔利的，难以认定经营赌场的营利目的，最终准许撤回起诉。卓安办理的但某案沿同一路径，把当事人定位为受雇的劳务提供者，把指控的抽头渔利数额逐笔核减。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch1 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>一、只是帮忙端茶记账，为什么被算成开设赌场罪的共犯\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh1>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">“场地是表哥租的、客人是表哥叫的、钱也是表哥拿的，我家人只是帮忙端茶倒水、记账，为什么也算开设赌场？”“那个六万多的抽头数额是怎么算出来的，里面有没有重复计算？”“情节严重是不是意味着一定得判五年以上？”这是但某家属提出的三个问题。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">但某是某市居民，没有犯罪前科。某年年初，其表哥在某居民楼内租用一套三居室，购置麻将桌、扑克、筹码等物品，组织他人以炸金花、推牌九等方式赌博，按局抽取水钱。但某受表哥邀请，在赌场内做辅助性工作：为客人提供茶水、记录台面输赢、在客人较多时代收部分现金并转交表哥。她每月从表哥处领取固定报酬，本人不参与赌博，未出资、未分红、未参与场所选址与赌局组织。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">赌场断断续续经营数月，每晚参与的客人少则四五人，多则十余人。场所不对外开放，参与人员多为表哥的熟人、朋友，需经介绍方可进入。案发后，公安机关认定该场所系赌博窝点，检察机关指控表哥犯开设赌场罪，指控但某犯开设赌场罪并以共犯论处。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">指控的核心依据是：从但某处扣押的记账本、手机转账记录显示，赌场累计抽头渔利 69275 元；但某负责记录台面输赢、代收赌资，属于赌场的管理人员，与表哥构成共同犯罪。按指控主张，69275 元已达到情节严重标准，对但某应在五年以上十年以下有期徒刑的幅度内量刑。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch1 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>二、权威案例给出的两套标尺：什么情形是开设赌场，什么情形只是聚众赌博\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh1>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">一套标尺来自《刑事审判参考》归纳的六条对照标准，另一套来自人民法院案例库入库案例确立的实质判断立场，两者的共同指向都是把“有没有形成经营性的赌博平台”作为分界。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>2.1 《刑事审判参考》总第 58 辑的六条区分标准\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">这一辑对聚众赌博与开设赌场的行为如何区分，给出了六个方面的对照：聚众赌博的规模一般较小，开设赌场的规模一般较大，营业场所大、赌博工具齐全、赌博方式多样，有专门为赌场服务的人员；聚众赌博的场所通常具有不固定性，有时是临时租赁，有时在宾馆开房进行，开设赌场的场所一般具有固定的营业地点；聚众赌博的时间具有临时性、短暂性，一次赌博结束后需要组织者再次组织，开设赌场的时间具有持续性和稳定性，在开放时间内赌博人员来到赌场即可进行；聚众赌博一般具有隐秘性，成员相对固定，开设赌场一般具有半公开性，开设的时间、地点、性质为一定范围的公众知晓；聚众赌博的赌头往往利用自己的人际关系召集每一次具体赌博活动，开设赌场的经营者一般不亲自参与召集；聚众赌博的赌头本人有时会参与赌博，开设赌场的经营者本人一般不参与赌博。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">这六条标准的好处是可以直接做成对照表使用。涉案场所的每一项特征落在这六条中的哪一侧，决定了它更接近聚众赌博还是开设赌场。需要提醒的是，六条标准的表述里带有“一般”二字，它们是综合判断的维度，不是各自独立的硬性要件。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>2.2 人民法院案例库入库案例：棋牌室案准许撤回起诉，微信群案认定开设赌场\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">入库案例中有一件与棋牌室直接相关。被告人无证经营棋牌室，二个月之间获利三万元，扣除正常营业开销后，与本地其他棋牌室的正常收入大体相当；收费方式为向每位参与者收取五十元台费，没有从棋牌室的组织管理活动中直接渔利。裁判理由指出，开设赌场的营利目的是期望通过对赌博活动进行有组织的管理获得明显高于正常营业收入的不当利益，本案难以认定被告人具有抽头渔利等经营赌场的营利目的，对该罪名的适用应当坚持实质危害性判断，不能仅凭人数众多等单一特征认定，最终准许撤回起诉。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">另一端是指导案例第 106 号谢检军等人开设赌场案、以及指导案例第 105 号洪小强等人开设赌场案。两案的裁判要旨确认，以营利为目的，通过邀请人员加入微信群的方式招揽赌客，设定赌博规则，利用微信群进行控制管理，在一段时间内持续组织赌博活动的，属于开设赌场。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">两端的差别正在于经营性：一端是收费相当于正常经营收入、未从组织管理中直接渔利的棋牌室，一端是设定规则、控制管理、持续面向不特定人群开放的赌博平台。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>2.3 两套标尺给出的四个区分维度\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Ctable style=\"width: auto; line-height: 2;\">\u003Ctbody>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>区分维度\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>偏向开设赌场罪的特征\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>偏向赌博罪的特征\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">经营性\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">以经营赌博平台获利，收入明显高于正常营业收入\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">收费仅相当于正常经营成本，如按人头收取台费\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">组织性\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">有分工与层级，有专门服务、望风、收账人员\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">组织松散，由赌头临时召集，无专门人员\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">公开性与人员范围\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">半公开，面向不特定多数人，参与者之间多不相识\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">相对封闭，参与者为熟人，需经介绍进入\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">持续性与规模\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">场所固定、时间连续稳定，规模较大\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">场所与时间均不固定，规模小，需每次重新组织\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Ftbody>\u003C\u002Ftable>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\"> \u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch1 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>三、卓安办理的但某案：定性与数额是怎么被同时改变的\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh1>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>3.1 案件起点：被认定为赌场管理人员，量刑建议指向五年以上\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">检察机关以开设赌场罪共犯指控但某，并主张抽头渔利 69275 元已达到情节严重标准。辩护要解决两个问题：她的行为在定性上属于组织管理还是受雇劳务；指控的数额在计算上能不能站住。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>3.2 第一层：用六要素分析把角色定位为受雇劳务\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">承办律师把场所的全部参与人员与全部特征逐项列出，沿组织性、规模性、控制性、持续性、隐秘性、本人是否参赌六个要素分析：场所由表哥选址租赁并决定赌局规则；客人由表哥招揽；水钱的抽取比例由表哥定；报酬形式是每月固定金额，与赌场收益不挂钩；但某本人不参赌、不出资、不分红。六项中的关键几项都指向一个结论：她提供的是可替代的劳务，处在被安排的位置上，而不是赌场的经营者。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>3.3 第二层：把三套材料的口径对齐，逐笔核减\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">数额辩护的做法是把记账本、转账记录与笔录三套材料按日期、场次、资金往来、计价口径四栏对齐。核对中发现三类问题：同一笔资金在不同场次被重复登记；部分款项属于参赌人员之间的借还款与台面筹码折算，不是抽头渔利；部分金额只有概括性证言支撑，没有账面或者流水印证。逐笔剔除之后，律师提出的意见是实际抽头渔利应为 34236 元，与指控的 69275 元相差 35039 元。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>3.4 本案的两项核心主张：定性上与数额上同时收缩\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">两项主张合起来形成一个完整结构：定性上，当事人属于受雇提供劳务的从犯，在情节显著轻微的情况下依法可以不作犯罪处理；退一步讲，即使认定构成犯罪，数额降至 34236 元之后，情节严重的数额基础不再存在，量刑区间应从五年以上十年以下回到五年以下一档。这种“定性加数额”的双线推进，是赌博类案件辩护的基本结构。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch1 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>四、律师观点与六个辩点：开设赌场的指控可以从哪六个地方收缩\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh1>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>4.1 两罪的分界是经营性，不是有没有抽头\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">《刑法》第 303 条第 1 款规定的赌博罪包括聚众赌博与以赌博为业，第 2 款规定的开设赌场罪从赌博罪中分离而来。两罪都会出现提供场所、赌具并抽头渔利的情形，因此抽头渔利本身不是区分点，区别在于有没有把赌博作为一种营业来经营。量刑上，开设赌场罪一般情节为五年以下有期徒刑、拘役或者管制，情节严重为五年以上十年以下有期徒刑；赌博罪最高三年。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ctable style=\"width: auto; line-height: 2;\">\u003Ctbody>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>审查维度\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>需要核实什么\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>核不实的后果\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">经营性\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">收费是否明显高于正常营业收入，是否从组织管理中直接获利\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">收费相当于正常经营成本的，难以认定经营赌场的营利目的\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">组织性\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">有无分工与层级、有无专门服务与望风收账人员、规则由谁设定\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">组织松散的，符合聚众赌博的特征\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">公开性\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">参与者是否为不特定多数人，是否向社会招揽\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">熟人封闭、需经介绍进入的，符合赌博罪特征\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">规模与持续性\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">场所是否固定、存续时间、参赌人数与涉案数额\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colspan=\"1\" rowspan=\"1\" width=\"240\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">临时组局、时间不固定的，符合赌博罪特征\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Ftbody>\u003C\u002Ftable>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\"> \u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>4.2 辩点一：经营性要从收入结构入手，台费与抽头是两回事\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">棋牌室与麻将馆最常见的经营方式是收取台费，也就是按桌按时收费。这种方式与从赌资中按比例抽水有本质区别：前者是场地与服务的对价，后者是从赌博活动中直接分利。审查方法是把收费方式、收费标准、与本地同类场所的对比、扣除成本后的净收入四项列出来。如果收费相当于正常经营收入，经营赌场的营利目的就难以认定。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>4.3 辩点二：参与人员的特定性决定是否面向不特定多数人\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">开设赌场的特征之一是面向一定范围的不特定公众开放。需要核实四件事：参与者之间是否相互熟识；进入场所是否需要介绍或者熟人带路；组织者有没有向社会招揽赌客；场所的开放时间是否对外公开。参与者为同学、朋友、同乡且相对固定，没有向社会招揽，行为更符合聚众赌博的特征。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>4.4 辩点三：抽头渔利的数额必须三套材料对齐，重复计算与性质混同要剔除\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">数额辩护是这类案件最具体也最见效的工作。把记账本、资金流水、言词证据三套材料按场次逐笔对齐，重点剔除四类金额：同一笔资金在不同场次被重复登记的；参赌人员之间的借还款与筹码折算；与赌博无关的其他往来款项；只有概括性证言而无账面材料印证的。凡三套材料无法相互印证的金额，应当主张不计入犯罪数额。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>4.5 辩点四：角色要分开，受雇劳务者应认定为从犯\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">把参与人员按角色列表：谁是组织者，负责定规则、提供场地、分配收益；谁是管理者，负责记账、放贷、看场；谁是劳务提供者，负责端茶倒水、接送客人、临时看门。只有组织者与管理者的行为才具备开设赌场的可罚基础。对于仅领取固定报酬、按指令提供劳务的，应当主张认定为从犯；报酬与赌博收益完全无关、知情范围有限的，可以进一步依《刑法》第 13 条但书主张情节显著轻微危害不大，不作犯罪处理。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>4.6 辩点五：赌资流水不是抽头渔利，量刑依据不能以流水代替渔利\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">赌资数额与抽头渔利数额是两个完全不同的数字，同一笔赌资在不同参赌人员之间反复流转，按流水累计会成倍放大。审查时需要把投注额、实际输赢额、账户流水三种口径分开，并主张同一笔资金只计算一次。凡控方以赌资流水直接替代抽头渔利的，应当指出两者在量刑依据上的不同地位，要求按其实际取得的渔利计算。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch2 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>4.7 辩点六：情节严重必须逐项对照，不能只看一个数字\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh2>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">情节严重的认定要按本案适用的标准逐项核对：抽头渔利数额、赌资数额、参赌人数、赌场存续时间、是否招揽未成年人、是否有暴力护赌或者为赌博提供放贷等情形。核对时有三处常见缺口：把断续经营的间歇期一并计入存续时间；把没有客观材料印证的概数计入人数与金额；把场所租金与水电等正常成本混同为渔利。把情节严重降格为基本档，量刑区间会直接从五年以上回落到五年以下。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch1 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>五、家属现在能做的四件事，以及律师的价值是什么\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh1>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">第一件，不要把手机里的转账记录、聊天记录自行删除或者整理后重发。这类案件的核心证据是资金与账目，家属出于保护心理清理记录，会被理解为隐匿证据，把原本可以逐笔核对清楚的数额变成无法核实。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">第二件，把能证明收费方式与收入水平的材料找齐。场所租赁合同与租金凭证、水电缴费单、台费收取标准、与本地同类场所的收费对比、家人每月的固定报酬记录，这几组材料共同指向一件事：这笔收入是场地与服务的对价，还是从赌博中分利。这直接决定经营性这一维度落在哪一侧。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">第三件，把家人实际做过的事按时间与内容写清楚。从哪天开始帮忙、每天做什么、每月拿多少、有没有参与定规则、有没有决定谁能进场、有没有收过抽水，这些细节决定角色定位。但某案能够把角色定位为受雇劳务，起点就是一份把“谁定规则、谁招客人、谁拿收益”三件事分开的事实梳理。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">第四件，尽早让专业律师介入，尤其要在数额鉴定或者审计意见出具之前。这类案件的数额往往以一份汇总材料呈现，一旦形成，后续推翻的成本很高。在汇总材料形成之前提出逐笔核对的要求，空间最大。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>律师的价值是什么\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">开设赌场罪与赌博罪在客观行为上高度交叉，同样的看场、记账、抽水，落在不同罪名上，量刑相差数年。律师的价值在于把场所的经营形态拆成经营性、组织性、公开性、规模与持续性四个维度逐项对照，再把当事人的角色从群体叙事里单独拎出来，同时把抽头渔利的三套材料逐笔对齐，剔除重复计算与性质混同的部分。这不是否认当事人参与过赌场事务，而是主张这件事在法律上的评价被抬高了。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">赌博类案件的辩护，需要同时处理罪名定性、数额核减、角色区分三件事，还要把行业收费水平、场所经营凭证这些外部材料调到手。只办刑事的律所，在这类交叉问题上的经验更集中，这是卓安在这类案件中最实在的价值。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ch1 style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>六、条文与案例索引\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fh1>\u003Cul>\u003Cli style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">《刑法》第 13 条、第 303 条；最高人民法院、最高人民检察院《关于办理赌博刑事案件具体应用法律若干问题的解释》第 1 条、第 2 条、第 9 条；《治安管理处罚法》相关规定\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">《关于办理网络赌博犯罪案件适用法律若干问题的意见》；《关于办理利用赌博机开设赌场案件适用法律若干问题的意见》\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fli>\u003Cli style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">《刑事审判参考》总第 58 辑关于聚众赌博与开设赌场区分的六条标准；最高人民法院指导案例第 105 号洪小强案、第 106 号谢检军案；人民法院案例库入库案例尉某平、贾某珍案、王某与李某旋案；卓安案例库：但某开设赌场案\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fli>\u003C\u002Ful>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>附：卓安在涉黑涉恶犯罪领域的积累与专业战队情况\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>办案积累：作为全国第三家只做刑事的律所，卓安成立以来专注刑事辩护与风险防控，累计办理各类刑事案件超 8000 起，其中涉黑涉恶犯罪案件 500 余件，涵盖组织、领导、参加黑社会性质组织罪，以及寻衅滋事、聚众斗殴、敲诈勒索、强迫交易、非法拘禁、开设赌场等关联罪名。涉案人员覆盖组织领导者到普通参与者各层级，已取得不认定黑、不认定恶、不起诉、撤案、改判轻刑、涉案财产解封等辩护效果。\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>专业出版：卓安累计出版法学专著 65 部、发表学术论文 203 篇，围绕公安机关、人民检察院、人民法院运行机制、律师辩护、办案程序与犯罪类型开展专项研究。涉黑涉恶方向编写《涉黑涉恶案件办案实务手册》，发表黑社会性质组织与恶势力犯罪认定研究论文，形成扫黑除恶裁判规则与证据审查指引。\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>培训与课程：卓安面向全国律师、公安机关、人民检察院、人民法院、企业、高校开展刑事辩护专题培训 800 余场，覆盖 31 个省、50 余个城市，培训超 12 万人次。涉黑涉恶方向已形成课程体系，包括《黑社会性质组织四个特征认定与辩护》《恶势力犯罪司法认定与排除技巧》《涉黑案件证据审查与非法证据排除》《企业家扫黑风险识别与防控》《反有组织犯罪法理解与适用》。\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>荣誉与行业认可：卓安律师获得各类荣誉表彰 100 余项，多名律师受聘为西北政法大学刑事法律科学研究中心、西南政法大学刑事辩护研究中心、华东政法大学律师学院等高校特邀研究员，并为四川省公安厅、中共成都市委政法委员会、成都市人民政府、成都市中级人民法院等 30 余家公安机关、人民检察院、人民法院及律师协会顾问单位提供咨询顾问服务。艾述洪律师于 2025 年荣任成都市律师协会刑事诉讼专业委员会主任。\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>涉黑涉恶专业战队：四川卓安律师事务所涉黑涉恶专业战队，是卓安在涉黑涉恶方向设立的专业办案与研究团队，由具有原公安机关、人民检察院扫黑除恶办案背景的律师、刑事诉讼法学专家与涉黑案件证据专家组成，定位为涉黑涉恶案件的定性纠错与轻刑辩护专业力量。主要职能包括：围绕黑社会性质组织“四个特征”与恶势力认定标准逐项审查证据，排除拔高认定；把当事人从被指控的犯罪组织中剥离，区分组织者、领导者、积极参加者与一般参加者；全面审查“四个特征”证据体系并依法申请非法证据排除；甄别合法财产与涉案财产，为案外人财产、配偶财产和家庭共同财产提出异议；在侦查、审查起诉、审判各阶段提交不认定黑恶的法律意见；编写办案实务手册与培训课程，输出扫黑除恶裁判规则与证据审查指引。\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>核心成员：\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">首席律师成安博士，执业近30年，长期研究涉黑涉恶案件的性质认定与财产辩护；\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">主任何冰冰律师，前市级人民检察院员额检察官、反贪局侦查科科长；\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">执行主任艾述洪律师，四川省首批刑事专业律师、卓安经济犯罪研究中心主任，擅长责任拆分与财产甄别；\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">副主任魏军律师，原成都市中级人民法院刑二庭副庭长，曾借调最高人民法院参与刑事庭审规程起草。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">专业战队以事实和法律为依据开展辩护，不作结果承诺。\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cimg src=\"https:\u002F\u002Ffile.tinglifangs.com\u002Fpro\u002Fother\u002F1790215978436.jpg\" alt=\"\" data-href=\"\" style=\"\">\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cu>卓安律师事务所官网http:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F\u003C\u002Fu>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">24小时刑事急救专线:17381975473、4000-148-149\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp style=\"line-height: 2;\">\u003Cspan style=\"font-size: 14px;\">\u003Cstrong>全文 End\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fspan>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>\u003Cbr>\u003C\u002Fp>","2026-09-24 10:13:17",{"id":43,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":27,"deleted":31,"code":411,"name":412,"icon":413,"sort":43,"status":6,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10},"professional","罪名分类","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002F8cfc49d7-c529-46c5-a6f1-d03a37047b2b.png",{"title":415,"description":416,"keywords":32,"canonical":417,"image":407,"jsonLd":418},"家人在棋牌室组牌局被定开设赌场罪，与赌博罪到底怎么区分？ - 罪名分类 | 四川卓安律师事务所","开设赌场罪与赌博罪的四个区分维度，与被指控之后的六个辩点 卓安律师事务所·涉黑涉恶犯罪专业委员会出品 发布时间：2026年9月24日 【摘要】 棋牌室组牌局被指控开设赌场，家属最不能接受的是场地、客人、钱都是别人的，怎么就成了开赌场。这个疑问指向本罪与赌博罪的分界：两罪都表现为提供场所、赌具并获利，量刑却差一档，开设赌","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002Fnews\u002Fprofessional\u002F665",[419],{"@context":361,"@graph":420},[421,427],{"@type":422,"@id":417,"url":417,"headline":406,"description":416,"datePublished":423,"dateModified":424,"author":425,"publisher":426,"articleSection":412,"inLanguage":366,"image":407},"Article","2026-09-24T10:13:17+08:00","2026-09-24T10:14:34+08:00",{"@id":368},{"@id":368},{"@type":428,"itemListElement":429},"BreadcrumbList",[430,433,435],{"@type":431,"position":6,"name":432,"item":358},"ListItem","首页",{"@type":431,"position":38,"name":412,"item":434},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002Fnews\u002Fprofessional",{"@type":431,"position":35,"name":406,"item":417}]