The Integration Of The Conviction And Sentencing Of The Fault Of The ATM Machine Withdrawals Behavior Analysis

The case about Xu Tin had caused widespread concern several years ago.Although the case has been concluded after some discussion, but I think it is also necessary to look a lot of focus in the case from a new perspective, such as re-determined to steal financial institutions from extended look forward to the possibility of mitigated punishment applicable understood the significance. The same time, the remaining issues of the case and not completely solved. For example, the crux of the second paragraph of Article63of the Criminal Code applicable judicial not get enough attention; how to clarify the powers and responsibilities of the relationship between the Bank and behavior; how perfect for ATM error brought a series of legal problems, also has yet to respond. I for some combing wording ideas, I hope to provide some reference solutions of similar cases.This article is made of20,000words and divided into five parts:The first part, Xu Tin came to a city of a bank’s automatic teller machine to withdraw money, inadvertently enter a digital, wanted to take one hundred, he did not expect the ATM actually spits out one thousand, and I am carrying amount only less one, his own account, only more than100pieces. After several withdrawals of more than ten million, the defendant would abscond, in case there are many controversial period of the case never commuted into a five-year term.The second part, the focus of the disputes which are summarized. Focus of controversy three:First, recognize the different nature of the withdrawal behavior; Second, differences in conviction; Third’s opinion of sentencing.The third part,the focus of the dispute is the analysis of criminal law. First, the nature of the acts, the subsequent withdrawal behavior infringes on the legal interests, harmful to society, has to look forward to the possibility, therefore identified as criminal in nature; Second conviction, Xu Ting’s behavior constitutes theft. Come to the defendant’s conduct does not constitute the first three crimes of embezzlement, fraud, credit card fraud and theft crimes constitute a theft. Third, the sentencing of Xu Ting can reduce the punishment. I redefine the theft of financial institutions of connotation, and look forward to the possibility of meaning in the extended sense, the instructions can be mitigated punishment.The fourth part is the crux of the63(2) of the Criminal Judicial Application by contrast with the case of He Peng, reflection. First, the applicable conditions are too general result in practice is difficult to grasp; Second; applicable procedures are too strict to make judges tried to avoid it.The fifth part is the idea of the legislation on the regulation of the use of the fault of the automatic teller machine withdrawals. Theft provisions from the Criminal Law Amendment (h) point out its shortcomings, constructed from the conviction and sentencing of two aspects of the regulation of this behavior. Conviction, set the independence of the charges; sentencing, set the punishment fits the crime and the legal punishment gradient difference.