Legal Analysis On The Case Of Sun Mou And Li Mou Forcibly Seizing Other People’s Property By Driving A Vehicle

The act of Forcibly Seizing Other People’s Property by Driving a Vehicle(the so called act of "snatching with speeding vehicles") should refer to the act that people drive or travel with high-speed transport, openly rob the property of others in the process of its high-speed driving. With the rapid economic development since the1990s, new forms of crimes continue to emerge, and with it this act gradually spreads to the mainland from the coastal cities and happens more and more frequently. As the act of "snatching property with speeding motor vehicle" severely violates the property right and threatens personal safety of citizens, and the subjective and objective aspects of it are complex, the theoretical community and all levels of the judiciary have been plagued by the crime conviction and sentencing.In July2002, the supreme people’s court published on the concrete application of law in the interpretation of some problems about the trial of criminal cases of robber, in a certain extent to clear the "speeding-car rob "qualitative. In June2005, the supreme people’s court published on criminal laws applicable to the opinions on some issues of the trial of robbery and looting again, to clear the consequences caused by injuries robbed the man qualitative, The "speeding-car rob" behaviors of some casualties consequences caused by negligence requires the punishment of such crimes as robbery, and aggravated. However, even the introduction of new judicial interpretations of such acts, does not solve all problems that exist in the judicial practice.Then study the nature of the act of "snatching property with speeding motor vehicle" has a strong sense of urgency and practical significance. The first part of this article by a piece of "speeding-car rob " case obtaining, summarizes the facts of the case, the results of the trial of two levels of courts and the decision basis. The second part sums up the focus of controversy in the case, which is the qualitative issues of speed robbing behavior; and that leads to the author’s introduction which contains: the concept and characteristics of the act; the attitudes of theoretical circles, the Criminal Law and judicial interpretations; and finally, the author’s own point of view for Speed robbing behavior. The third part summarizes the author’s evaluation of the judges of the court; and then it proposes for prevention strategies of the act of speed robbery:on the one hand, the legislative level should improve its sentencing provisions and modify related judicial interpretation; and on the other hand, a series of measures must be taken.