On The Dividing Line Of Crime Of Misappropriation And Offense Of Theft

Theft and Embezzlement crime are different forms of property offence crime, judicial practice sometimes is difficult to make clear and precise definition. The basic characteristic of theft violates victims' will, use of peaceful means to occupy others' property for its own possession in secret transfer way. Basic characteristic of occupation personal belongings crime is changing lawful possession illegal. Basic characteristic of embezzlement is exploiting one's position, using various means to turn illegal property into legal. This is main characteristic between them, but only mastering these basic characteristics, we can not completely and accurately separate them. We still can hardly identify them in strict accordance with factors of crime.This dissertation starts with from living specific cases, which relying on the element of crime theoretical knowledge and attempting to clarify limits between theft and embezzlement and hoping to express legal learners' views through exposition. This dissertation is consistent of four parts. The first part exposits factors of theft and embezzlement. It clarifies relevant legal conception and lefts theoretical foreshadowing for case analysis back. The second part compares theft and "ordinary embezzlement", clarifies the distinction and linkages of "took custody", "possession", packaging and content belonging whom. The third part compares theft and "special embezzlement" and mainly clarifies that what is forgotten, how to singe forgotten and great significance of forgotten conception to singe theft and embezzlement. Then it expounds something buried conception, in light of occupation something buried action rare and relatively simple. It expounds actual distinction between theft and occupation something buried through analysis of specific cases. The fourth part compares theft and embezzlement. It clarifies the limits between theft and embezzlement. Used of his position and conditions, it is embezzlement duty. No use of his position and conditions, perhaps it is theft. Of course there is other detailed distinction between them.Finally, it is conclusion. It concludes limits between invasion personal property crimes and theft, between theft and Embezzlement duties.