The Cognizance Of Transformative Indoor Robbery

Due to its characteristics that both personal rights and property rights are infringement, robbery has always been the concern objects for theory and practice. A transformative robbery is that a behavior is defined as robbery of a crime by law in the particular case, and the provisions of the criminal law about it are very simple and general, the relevant judicial explanation also can not introduce it clearly. There are more questions when we talk about transformative robbery with indoor crime pattern, many scholars vague on some dispute, they can not get one view insisted by everyone, such as the preconditions of the transformative robbery;how to define the extent of violence behavior; which condition can be defined into transformative indoor robbery; the accomplishment about this crime;all these brings many puzzles related operations to the judicial practice. Based on the analysis of a case and some dispute initiated, the author just hopes to help address these issues.This paper is divided into four parts altogether.The first part:case studies. Introduced the courts, the defendant Zhu Junhui into homes for theft, after it was found that against the victim by violence by minor injury to catch the basic facts and the Guangzhou baiyun area, Guangdong province, the people's court and the intermediate people's court of first and second on this case.The second part:the disputes and disagreements about the case. The focus and dispute is:1, Is Zhu Junhui's behavior a transformative robbery, the preconditions of the transformative robbery, whether must constitute a crime behavior? What degree does the violence behavior get that the behavior can be convicted? 2, whether Zhu Junhui's behavior belong to a transformative indoor robbery, a transformative robbery are applicable generally robbery plot aggravating violates stipulation? What conditions shall be deemed it is indoor robbery?The third part:the legal comments involved the case. In this part, the author first to present relevant laws and regulations, and shall be introduced in enshrining no ambiguity combining theoretical research of scholars views about the cognizance of transformative robbery, the author finally concludes:a transformative robbery in the previous behavior does not constitute a crime, namely, so long as there is for elements of theft, robbery, and the action of bilk, in conformity with converting conditions under the situation that can maintain for robbery. At the same time, in order to resist to be arrested, hold the money or destroy evidence to use violence or by threat of violence, as long as the violence levels to achieve enough to restrain others and cause the victim can't or afraid to resist, the behavior maintain crime constitutes. Secondly the author agrees that transformative robbery exist the aggravating form, namely a transformative robbery with the specific conditions can be identified as to be indoor robbery. Again, the author made a definition of "a transformative indoor robbery" by the analysis about relatively concept, and analyzes some questions, such as one who must have the illegal purpose can be said have a indoor crime, violence or violent intimidation behavior must occur indoors and so on, the author thinks that the previous behavior of a transformative indoor robbery is not only limited indoor thief,but also indoor fraud and indoor snatch, and unless the crime satisfy special conditions besides the three limited ruled by regulations, it can be recognized as a transformative indoor robbery. Finally the author thinks that as well as general robbery, there are also accomplishment and abortive attempt of the transformative indoor robbery, and the distinguish standard is identical. As an actor actually obtains property or cause the victim of the above results for minor injuries, he gets the robbery accomplishment, whereas the above two results are not appear, there just a robbery with attempted.The forth part:the case processing opinion and trigger some ideas and legislation. The author insists that Zhu Junhui's behavior has constituted a transformative robbery, but shall not be considered as a transformative indoor robbery. Finally by the analysis on this case, the author put forward several suggestions about criminal law and related provisions, in order to help to improve the legislation.