Come in a bit, I have something to say.

Fraud refers to the act of intentionally deceiving others, causing them to be under erroneous judgments, and making declarations of intent based on those erroneous judgments. Article 68 of the Supreme People's Court's "Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Implementation of the General Principles of Civil Law of the People's Republic of China (Trial)" stipulates: 'If one party intentionally provides false information to the other party, or deliberately conceals the true situation, inducing the other party to make an erroneous declaration of intent, it can be recognized as fraudulent conduct.' According to this provision, the following conditions must be met to constitute fraud:
First, the fraudster must have fraudulent intent. Fraudulent intent refers to the psychological state in which the fraudster knows that the information provided to the other party is false, that it will cause the defrauded party to fall into a false understanding, and wishes or allows this result to occur. It includes the intent to cause the defrauded party to be mistaken and the intent to cause the defrauded party to make a certain declaration of intent based on the erroneous understanding. The intent must be based on the fraudster's knowledge of the factual situation and the defrauded party's lack of knowledge of the facts; otherwise, it does not constitute fraud.
Second, the fraudster must engage in fraudulent conduct. Fraudulent conduct refers to the fraudster intentionally concealing facts or providing false information through words, writing, or actions. This includes creating, altering, or hiding facts in order to cause the defrauded party to be mistaken, deepen the mistake, or maintain the mistake. Fraud can occur either through action or inaction. Inaction primarily refers to situations where there is a legal, customary, or contractual obligation to disclose the truth, but the fraudster intentionally fails to fulfill this disclosure duty.
Third, the defrauded party must be misled due to the fraudster's fraud; that is, the misjudgment should be caused by fraud, not by the defrauded party's negligence. Here, the error refers to the defect in the party's understanding of the main content of the contract. If the defrauded party is not misled, the fraudulent intent and conduct of the fraudster do not result in legal consequences of fraud. Additionally, there must be a causal relationship between the fraud and the misleading of the defrauded party.
Fourth, the defrauded party makes a declaration of intent based on the mistaken understanding. Declaration of intent refers to the expression by which the declarant conveys their intention to establish a legal act externally. When making the declaration, the defrauded party believes it to reflect their true intention, which would result in the expected legal consequences. In fact, due to the fraud, the declaration of intent does not produce the expected legal consequences.That is, there must be a causal relationship between the declaration of intent by the defrauded person and the error they fall into. If the defrauded person, although misled into an erroneous belief due to fraud, does not make a declaration of intent because of the erroneous belief, it does not constitute fraud.
In addition, fraud must involve actions that violate laws and regulations or the principle of good faith. Fraud that is beneficial to society or others, or that is committed in good faith, does not constitute fraud.