A Study Of Crime Of Seizing

In theory, crimes of robbery and theft have been deeply studied, but the researches on crime of seizing, which exists independently between the above-mentioned crimes, are relatively few. In the judicial practices, the cases of forcibly seizing especially seizing by means of utilizing the motor vehicles are increasing daily, and thus many controversial questions about their conviction and punishment arise, so the study on crime of seizing has great theoretical value and realistic meaning. In most countries of Continental Law and Anglo-American Law Systems, the act of forcible seizure is classified into robbery or theft. However, in the countries and districts where crime of seizing is considered as a kind of independent crime, its range changes according as the violence of robbing is required in various degrees and whether secretly stealing is one of constitutive requirements of theft. The targets of crime of seizing all can be those of theft, but the targets of theft are not included by those of seizing. The amount involved is the one of constitutive requirements in determining crime of seizing, while the circumstances have no functions in this aspect. Whoever forcibly seizes public or private money or property, if the amount is relatively large, shall be guilty of seizing, and shall be imaginative joinder of offences of negligently causing another serious injury or negligent homicide if at the same time he causes another serious injury or death and then shall be convicted and punished in accordance with the provisions for a heavier punishment. It is reasonable that the act of seizing with lethal weapons is only considered as one of thecircumstances for a heavier punishment for committing crime of seizing. Under the present legislation, seizing with lethal weapons is a supplement to the act of robbing since the former cannot be included in the act of robbing by coercion. It should be clear and concrete that whether the doer can control and dominate the money or property being seized is considered as criterion to differentiate between an accomplished offense and an attempted one. In view of determining forcibly seizing by means of utilizing the motor vehicles, the acts should be analyzed differently according to the subjective attitude and objective actions of doers.