The Means Of "Secret Theft"in The Larceny

From the point of view of the world crime state, theft, as a sort of property crimes, shows a multiple trend and occupies a high proportion in all crimes against property. In China, theft is the mainly kind of crimes against property, about87%, and the primary type of criminal offense, about70%. From the point of view of the development history, property crimes showed a substantial upward trend on the volume and the rate of filing since the reform and opening up. Objectively speaking, a large number of actors will be rolled into the criminal proceedings about the crime of theft, and its results often involves a person’s property, liberty (be limited or deprived).This is a serious matter. Therefore, it is extremely important and valuable that identifies the theft crimes accurately. The identification of theft crime easily occur controversy in the judicial practice and theory of crimes against property, e.g., one of the crucial dispute, the "secret theft" whether should be as the essential characteristic of the objective elements of theft. In2006, the sensational case of Xu Ting is to let this significant controversy being shown in front of the theory researchers, the practitioners and even the judicial community. Subsequently,"The Boundaries of Theft and Snatch ", written by Prof. Zhang Ming Kai, criticized the traditional view on theft crime comprehensively and systematically, and denied the "secret theft" should be as the objective requirements of judgment element.In this paper, by studied the major theft crimes in the history of our country and in the main overseas countries ruled by law carried out that the theft crimes is not only limited by the approach of objective performance "secret theft". For the "secretive" of theft actions and its related issues, the criminal law theory in China gradually transformed this objective cognitive from the "absolutely secret" into the "relative secret" such a subjective perception."Relative secret" greatly expanded the meaning of theft behaviors in the traditional theory, and mitigated the constraints of "absolutely secret" for theft judgments. As a new viewpoint, it is swiftly recognized by the experts and soon became the general criminal theories of our country, now being used frequently to maintain social stability and to smoothly fight against crime. On the other hand, On the other hand, with the society developing, more and more new forms of crime presented and the modus operandi of crime also changed, China’s criminal law theory advocated "secret steal" are constantly being questioned. I believe that we should not involve any individual emotional and too many subjective factors to determine academic point of view in the presence of academic dispute, but should explain whether we can achieve the theoretical self-consistency as a criterion. Meanwhile, the explanation whether can better adapt to the requirements of judicial practice, and whether can better integrate the practical application of the law to guide the judicial practice, from the objective point of view of the law to make a judgment or theoretical explanation can be able to make others to believe, and also can be able to meet the real purport of legislation, which play the most effective legal value. In this present, I supports the point of view that "blatant theft also belong theft", and gives specific, more objective explain at both theoretical and practice two parties. Some further suggestions given at last.