article 37 of the administrative punishment law: "the provisions of laws, regulations and rules at the time of the illegal act shall apply to the implementation of administrative punishment. However, when the decision on administrative punishment is made, the laws, regulations and rules have been revised or abolished, and the new provisions are lighter or not considered illegal, and the new provisions shall apply. " This article is the newly established principle of "from the old to the lighter" in the revision of the Administrative Punishment Law, and it is also the embodiment of Article 93 of the Legislative Law in the field of administrative punishment. In fact, in the field of criminal law, this applicable principle has been clearly defined in 1979, and this principle has matured in the practice of criminal law for many years. The introduction of this principle in the Administrative Punishment Law is not only conducive to the accuracy of laws and regulations by law enforcement personnel in law enforcement practice. The principle of "being lenient with the old" is closely related to "retroactivity of law". What is retroactivity of law? After a new law comes into effect, if the new law can be applied to the behavior that has not been punished before it comes into effect, it means that the new law has retrospective effect, otherwise it has no retrospective effect. "Be lenient with the old" means that the law at the time of the act should be applied in principle, but if the new law is more beneficial to the actor, the new law should be applied. It is worth noting that the following situations should be excluded from the application of the principle of "be lenient with the old": 1. The occurrence of illegal acts and the decision on punishment are not adjusted by Article 37 of the new Administrative Punishment Law, but should be punished according to the provisions of the old law. 2. The occurrence of illegal acts and the decision on punishment are all made after the implementation of the new law, and are not subject to the adjustment of Article 37 of the new Administrative Punishment Law, and shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the new law. 3. The illegal act conforms to the prescription provisions of Article 36 of the new Administrative Punishment Law, and no administrative punishment will be given, and it will not be adjusted by Article 37 of the new Administrative Punishment Law. 2 The following analysis is combined with specific cases. Case 1: In March, 221, the market supervision administration of a certain place found that a food operator sold prepackaged foods without a Food Business License, which was suspected of violating the provisions of the first paragraph of Article 35 of the Food Safety Law, so it filed an investigation. On April 29, 221, the first paragraph of Article 35 of the Food Safety Law was amended as "The State implements a licensing system for food production and operation. Engaged in food production, food sales, catering services, shall obtain a license according to law. However, the sale of edible agricultural products does not require permission. If only prepackaged foods is sold, it shall be reported to the food safety supervision and administration department of the local people's government at or above the county level for the record. " There is no need to obtain permission to sell only prepackaged foods. At this time, the case has not yet been decided on administrative punishment. Should the new law or the old law be applied? A: The party concerned has committed an act-selling prepackaged foods without obtaining a Food Business License, and April 29, 221 is the demarcation point. Before that date, this act is illegal, and after that, this act is not illegal. And when the new law came into effect on April 29, 221, the case had not yet been decided on administrative punishment. According to the provisions of Article 37 of the new Administrative Punishment Law, the new law should be applied. Case 2: On December 5, 221, a certain market supervision bureau filed a case to investigate and deal with an operator who was suspected of selling e-cigarettes without obtaining the Tobacco Monopoly Retail License, and found that the operator had been selling e-cigarettes without a license from May 3, 22 to December 4, 221. On November 1, 221, the Regulations for the Implementation of the Tobacco Monopoly Law of the People's Republic of China was revised. Article 65 is added: "Electronic cigarettes and other new tobacco products shall be implemented with reference to the relevant provisions of these Regulations on cigarettes". Before that, the relevant laws and regulations did not include the sale of electronic cigarettes in the pre-license. Should the market supervision bureau apply the old law or the new law to the unlicensed sale of electronic cigarettes? A: The parties sold electronic cigarettes without a license from May 3, 22 to November 9, 221. At that time, laws and regulations did not consider it illegal, so they were not punished. Since the implementation date of the new Regulations on the Implementation of the Tobacco Monopoly Law of the People's Republic of China, it is considered that this behavior is illegal, so its illegal behavior from November 1 to December 4, 221 shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the new Regulations on the Implementation of the Tobacco Monopoly Law. Case 3: On November 8, 213, the market supervision department of a certain place investigated and dealt with a business operator who specialized in selling goods infringing on the exclusive right to use registered trademarks of others. After investigation, the business operator has been selling the infringing goods from October 212 to November 213. Article 52 of the old Trademark Law (21 edition) reads: "Any of the following acts is an infringement of the exclusive right to use registered trademarks: ...... The corresponding penalty is Article 53: "If one of the acts listed in Article 52 of this Law infringes the exclusive right to use a registered trademark, ..... if the administrative department for industry and commerce finds that the infringement is established, it shall be ordered to immediately stop the infringement, confiscate and destroy the infringing goods and tools specially used to manufacture infringing goods and forge the logo of a registered trademark. And may be fined ..... "Paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the revised Trademark Law (which came into effect on August 31, 213) stipulates:" If you sell a commodity that you don't know is infringing the exclusive right to use a registered trademark, and you can prove that the commodity is legally obtained by yourself and the supplier, the administrative department for industry and commerce shall order you to stop selling it. "How to punish the party concerned for this illegal act? Answer: Based on the generalized intention, the parties have committed several independent and continuous illegal acts in a period of more than one year. According to the reply from the former Legislative Affairs Office of the State Council to the Legislative Affairs Office of the Hubei Provincial People's Government (Guo Fa Han [25] No.442), the continuous state of illegal acts means that "the parties have continuously implemented several independent administrations based on the same illegal intention. The behavior of the parties concerned can be regarded as an illegal act, which lasted from the period of the old law to the implementation of the new law. The old Trademark Law held that this was an illegal act and should be punished. The new Trademark Law held that as long as the operator proved that he did not know that the commodity was a commodity that infringed the exclusive right to use a registered trademark, and could provide evidence to prove that the commodity was legally obtained by himself and explained the supplier, he could be exempted from punishment and just ordered to stop selling the commodity involved. The punishment of this new law is obviously lighter. Since several acts in a continuous state are intended to be an illegal act, the act is a unified whole and cannot be separated, so the provisions of the new law should be uniformly applied. Case 4: On July 16, 221, the market supervision and management department of a certain place filed a case to investigate and deal with the illegal behavior of a food operator who was suspected of dealing in food with drugs. The investigation found that the operator was suspected of dealing in this kind of food illegally from May 5, 22 to June 3, 221, and the corresponding penalty for this illegal behavior was Item (6) of Paragraph 1 of Article 123 of the Food Safety Law: "The food and drug supervision and management department of the people's government at or above the county level confiscated the illegal income and the illegally produced and operated food. .................................................................................................................................................................................. If the case does not meet the requirements of the legal review in Article 58 of the new Administrative Punishment Law, should the legal review be conducted? A: This case perfectly explains whether the new law and the old law can be applied in a case. It should be noted that when comparing the punishment of the parties between the old and new legal norms, the relevant laws and regulations should be considered as a whole. Before the revision of the new Administrative Punishment Law, the third part of the Notice of the Supreme People's Court on Printing and Distributing the Summary of the Symposium on the Application of Legal Norms in the Trial of Administrative Cases, "Rules on the Application of Old and New Legal Norms" stipulates: "According to the general understanding and practice in administrative trials, the behavior of the administrative counterpart occurred before the implementation of the new law, and the specific administrative act was made after the implementation of the new law. When the people's court examines the legality of the specific administrative act, the provisions of the old law shall apply to substantive issues and the provisions of the new law shall apply to procedural issues. (two) the application of the new law is more beneficial to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the administrative counterpart; (3) The entity provisions of the new law shall apply according to the nature of the specific administrative act. " In this case, the determination of illegal income is a substantive issue, and the "profit theory" is more beneficial to the parties than the "full theory", so the provisions of the old law should be applied. In terms of procedures, the legal review has changed from the original "full review" to the "partial review" of the new law, and the provisions of the new law should be applied. To sum up, the application of the principle of "from the old to the lighter" should be analyzed in combination with specific cases, so as to be targeted and prescribe the right medicine, and finally realize the purpose of combining punishment with education.