Several Issues On Embezzlement

Embezzlement is the act of using other people’s property temporarily and having intention to return,which is illegal use of other act. With the development of social economic level, asset value human owning is also rising, assets with huge value like cars, helicopters have already entered our lives. However, criminal means also become more diversified, for example:stealing car,stealing ships or cattle,misappropriation houses, misappropriation of computer network resources and so on. The more assets Citizens own,criminal law protection of right of using assets has become more necessary, coupled with the increasing number of embezzlement, part of them has seriously violated the property rights and interests of citizens.In conclusion Punishment for embezzlement behavior should cause our attention.To qualitative misappropriation rigorously, punish part of them reasonably and protect property rights roundly, misappropriation should be to get a new definition. In Japan, in order to punish part of misappropriation, Japanese scholars have tried to explain the purpose of illegal possession to interprete part of the misappropriation with the purpose of illegal possession rigidly, which leads expansion the interpretation of the the purpose of illegal possession. In addition, at first Japanese court identified whether the misappropriation should be penalized by judging whether the human has the return meaning, and later, to meet the need of further expansion of penalties embezzlement, the court still determined that the person has the purpose of illegal possession and punish the misappropriation, even though the people had returning intention when transferring property. This indicates that in order to achieve the purpose of punishment part embezzlement, Japanese courts expanded the interpretation of purpose of illegal possession and even confuse the definition. Obviously, this method is not only expansion the interpretation of purpose of illegal possession, but also further blurs the boundaries of misappropriation and embezzlement, so that the Court can freely determine which misappropriation can be fined.Through the comparative analysis method, in Chinese court the identification of misappropriation is same as Japanese. The mainstream view is that the embezzlement also needs illegal possession of as subjective element in our country. Similarly, faced with part of misappropriation which is considerable punishable, scholars have also tried to explain the purpose of illegal possession of ways to broaden the scope of punishment for embezzlement, which will make part of misappropriation to be classified as embezzlement. And this way has a big flaw: first it will also lead to the expansion explaination of the purpose of illegal possession; secondly part of punishable misappropriation would have heavy sentencing discretion; and finally this interpretation approach does not punish all punishable misappropriation. China’s criminal law does not have detailed regulation, judicial interpretation also fails to solve this defect and just punish the behavior of misappropriation of car. Through analysising the existing judicial interpretation about misappropriation qualitative, it shows that punishment of misappropriation is too narrow, only misappropriation of motor vehicles can be penalized, resulting in limitations of the misappropriation punishment.Faced with all kinds of misappropriation, explaining the purpose of illegal possession can not meet the needs of misappropriation penalties. In order to resolve the deficiency of this method, on the basis of comparative analysis of Chinese and foreign criminal law provisions of the misappropriation, the preliminary legislative proposals about embezzlement crimes is put forward. Misappropriation should be separately convicted in criminal law, which can be resolved this defect of misappropriation qualitative within the existing legal framework. Embezzlement crimes is defined that illegal use of public or private property with a return of intent, or theft of a large amount of special property, multiple acts of misappropriation. This paper elaborates the content of misappropriation crimes in an innovative way, which provides theoretical evidence to design misappropriation as a separate accusation.