The Judicial Application Of The New Types Of Larceny

According to the statistics of criminal case all around our country，the incidencerate of larceny is the highest. With the development of society，new phenomena ofnew types of larceny emerge in an endless stream，and there are lots of strangeobjective performances of larceny，needing in-deep discussion in legislation andjudicature."Criminal law amendment (8)" added three new theft crimes，including theBurglary，with Lethal Theft and Pick-pocketing，which are parallelled to “stealing alarge amount of public or private property” and “commit theft repeatedly” as theselective conditions to constitute a crime，this article reduces the standard ofconviction，increases the punishment of these new types of larceny， and contributesto strict the legislation. However，the legislative changes lead to extensive discussionamong scholars，without unanimous opinion until now，which absolutely will bringgreat inconvenience and confusion to the judicial practice. Viewing the judicial casesafter “criminal law amendment (8)”，judicature still hasn’t form a conclusion on thelegislative purpose and method to identify the three new types of larceny. Obviously，this will lead to imbalance for the conviction and penalty of similar cases.In addition to the introduction and conclusion，the text is divided into threechapters:The first chapter discusses the identification of “Burglary”. Firstly，based on theconcept of “home” and “housebreaking” in “robbery of housebreaking” amongacademic circles and legislation，the first two sections define the interwoven legalterms such as "home"，" housebreaking "between the burglary and robbery ofhousebreaking，then discuss the nature and objective performance of “housebreaking”and the intention of suspects. Secondly，the third section affirms that larceny is consequential offense in the front. Then we discuss general standard of the start andaccomplishment of burglary on the basis of the real objective theory and the controltheory.The second chapter discusses the identification of “Lethal theft”. Firstly，thefirst three sections，based on academic and legislation，define the category of weaponwhich is different from tools for crime，and identify carrying weapons from thesubjective and objective viewpoint. Secondly，the forth section，make it certain thatholding a weapon doesn’t mark the start of with Lethal theft. Then I discuss thestandards and time node which is important to determine whether a theft with lethalweapons accomplished or not based on the result theory and the control theory.The third chapter discusses the identification of “Pick-pocketing”. Firstly，in thefirst section， according to opinions of the concept and characteristics ofPick-pocketing existed in judicial practices，academic and related legislation，we canmake it clear that what is the border of pick-pocketing，and apparently，it ispick-pocketing which should be convicted，not pick-pocketing with lethal weapons，that is to say，“with lethal weapon” isn’t the necessary conditions for pick-pocketing.Secondly，in the second section，we discuss general standard of the start andaccomplishment of Pick-pocketing on the basis of the real objective theory and thecontrol theory.