Abstract: The legal interest in the protection of huge unidentified property crime lies in the trust of citizens in the integrity of the state employees， and the view that the legal protection of this crime is duty integrity is plausible. This is contrary to the “Legal Truth” Theory in our litigation system. The subject of this crime is the state employee. The view that “other person engaged in public service according to law” is not the subject of the crime has fallen into the trap of “naturalistic fallacy”. Since this crime is work-related， the employee who has just entered the service only has an obligation to explain the huge amount of property acquired after his employment that exceeds legal income. In the context of non-action， the act of committing this crime is “cannot explain the source”. It is impossible to establish this crime for the state employee after leaving his position because the crime subject does not match.

Key words: huge unidentified property crime, legal truth, duty integrity, naturalistic fallacy