Several Studies Of The Crime Of Fraud

The crime of fraud is more common in practice counts, and this is a constantcrime. Only by virtue of this criminal law, we can only get a pattern of behavior, whichis to deceive or conceal the truth to others to recognize the error and to dispose ofproperty to the perpetrator or a third person to acquire property, while the victims andproperty damage. The pattern of behavior can only be deal with the general case. Thecase in reality does not follow this pattern of behavior to develop, but a variety. Forexample, the behavior of people to deceive, dupe is not the owner of the property todispose of property, then whether the perpetrator constitute fraud? which crime dose hecrime if he does not constitute a crime of fraud? Or such as the perpetrator enjoyed forits own legitimate claims due to deceive each other in the form of maturity debt can beachieved at this time whether the perpetrator constitute fraud? The purpose of this paperis to solve these problems. The paper will analyze the crime of fraud from three aspects:the fraud, the disposition and the property damage. The author think, the essence offraud is the false issues of the victim based on the perpetrator, or pass out falseinformation into or continue to maintain the sanctions the understanding of error and todispose of their property, by others into the error of the understanding of the dispositionof property and continue to maintain or enhance the understanding of the disposition ofproperty error. Both fraud, to deceive by facts or value judgments. The author also think,in this case of victims and deceived by the same person, the disposition of property inthe case of fraud must be the victims, which is both the owner of the property and thesimple possession of property. But in the case of victims and deceived are not the sameperson, this article shares the view of authorize, which think we should judge thedisposing of property by victims is in the range of generality authorized or not, if it is,we think the behavior constitute fraud; but if it is not, this behavior dosen’t constitutefraud. Except the objective of the transfer, dose the fraud of crime still need to disposeof property of consciousness? There are three doctrines in the academia, they are thedoctrine of dispose of property necessity, the doctrine of property unnecessity and thedoctrine of distinguish. In the discourse of property damage, firstly affirmed the scope of "property" includes property interests. Because the property interest is an interest, asother financial, the value to be included in the scope of "property" is more conducive tothe protection of legal interests. The discussed separately four special circumstancesconstitute property damage or not, they are payment for illegal reasons, exercise theirrights, exempt from illegal debt, behavior of people who have been deceived to payquite right price. In the end of the article described the difference between fraud andtheft, the difference between the two has been an important and difficult in the criminaljustice because of the great similarity in the behavior of the process between the twoguiltise. This article focuses on the disposition of the angle difference defraud and theft,think that the disposition is the key of division of fraud and theft. The case of thevictims to dispose of property belong to defraud and is not the part of Theft, but thevictim did not sanction the behavior of the property, behavior by capturing propertytheft is not a crime of fraud.