Embezzlement, Theft, Unjust Enirchment Of In Gu Mou Theft

What is the theft? What is on? What is unjust enrichment? In theory relatively easy todivide, in practice because of the degree of knowledge, ability and other factors affecting the,"legal person" on the related concept of understanding, to grasp the specific evidence" eachaccording to his lights" phenomenon, often not easy to separate, resulting in qualitativedispute case. How to grasp the crime with the non-crime, this crime and other crimes? Withthe aid of judicial practice in a specific case, in accordance with the briefs, disputes anddifferences in opinion analysis and personal conclusion sequence, the cases involved theconcept analysis one by one and learn from others on the basis of research results to drawtheir own opinion about the case.This paper is about1.56words, consists of seven parts.The first part, introduction. This section contains the reason and significance of writingthis article from two aspects of content. Because of the related knowledge understanding isnot completely may result in the case of attack is too wide, indulgence of crime situation,difficult to achieve" the case is finalized " social effect. Meaning is" learn in order to practise",the thesis writing for future practice encountered similar case to provide guidance andexperience.The second part, case. Gu Mou theft.The third part, the case synopsis. This part briefly summarizes the case occurs, i.e. thesuspect Gu Mou in Guiyang city bus station by security, while others give, picking up lost knapsack suitcase after the escape, were seized by the public security organ.The fourth part, the focus of controversy. The focus of controversy is how to determinethe behavior of Gu Mou, what is its theft or embezzlement, or is not established crime belongsto the civil law, unjust enrichment.The fifth part, controversies and disagreements. Mainly introduces the Gu Mou casedifferences of opinion, the case has three kinds of opinions, the first view of Gu Mou’sbehavior establishment crime of theft; second think Gu Mou’s behavior does not constitute thecrime, which belongs to the civil law on unjust enrichment; the third kind of viewpoint thinksGu Mou’s behavior establishment crime than theft.The sixth part, legal analysis. This part is the core content, and concrete is divided intofive sections. First, Gu Mou’s behavior does not belong to the civil law on unjust enrichment.The section through the elaborate system of unjust enrichment related content, then the unioncase, analysis and argumentation of Gu Mou’s behavior is beyond the limits of the criminallaw of unjust enrichment in the category. Second, from the crime of encroachment and theftdistinction at. This section from the constitutive requirement, analysis of the theft crime andembezzlement of the difference between. Third, to understand. This section describes theforgotten property and lost property difference, personal endorsement of two no essentialdifference. In fourth, Gu Mou’s behavior was not larceny. This section focuses on the analysisof problems of a certain object occupies, is completely out of possession, and then points outthat the Gu Mou are picked up property has had problems, therefore not established theft. In fifth, Gu Mou act constitutes a crime of embezzlement. The section around the embezzlementcrime analysis, proves Gu Mou acts constitute a crime of embezzlement.The seventh part, conclusion. The conclusion points out that Gu Mou’s behaviorestablishment crime, is a case of private prosecution, procuratorate shall make a decision toapprove arrest.