A Study On The Behavior Of Taking Money After The Implementation Of Violence

Behavior on the perpetrator of violence, coercion and other ways to obtain the property of others whether it is not in dispute in judicial practice and in theory, but when the victim was killed by the perpetrator to take money or property of the victim made spur of the moment after the other violent crimes the identified but there is this big controversy. Theory exists robbery, theft, embezzlement, robbery crime all kinds of theories, can be described as flourishing. In judicial practice, the Supreme Court made the relevant judicial interpretations on the spur of the moment get others to violence acts were considered property, to quell the controversy judicial practice, but it is reasonable, but debatable.From the author’s point of view on the interpretation of robbery, theft, embezzlement charges analyze several nature, clear as the various offenses must have the constituent elements and constitutes a logical relationship between elements. On the basis of constituent elements drawn elements constitute robbery illegal possession purpose of this does not become a must produce before the end of violence, when the perpetrator’s behavior after the violence, which spur of the moment to take fiscal behavior depending on the fiscal locations it should be recognized as theft embezzlement, or snatch crime.