The Criminal Qualitative Of IOU Robbery

In modern society, property interest has become an important part of public and private property. Under this background, property interest can be used as the object of property crime has become the consensus of legislators and specialists; property interest as well as the tangible property is an important object of the criminal law protection. The credit set in folk debit and credit activities is a property right, and as a kind of property interest it is also an object of the criminal law protection. In practice crime cases of IOU robbery have experienced frequent occurrence. Essentially, it take an serious involvement to the interests for creditors by criminal way, and it is not conducive to the market transaction security and stability of economic order, with serious social harm, the behavior should suffer the criminal punishment. But for how to determine the accusation for the criminal acts of robbery IOU, it has always been controversial, although the view layer but inconclusive. The crux of the problem lies in the object of the crime and the legal interest that IOU robbery infringes should be how to define, whether the credit can be regarded as an object of crime or legal interest of robbery. The author thinks that this issue needed to take a view from the angle of the criminal law protection for credit, and based on the theory of possession system in the criminal law, combined with the trend of credit turning into property right, the pledge of obligation, quasi-possession of credit in civil law, put forward the conclusion that the specific types of credit can become the object of possessive in criminal law and then become the object of robbery when meet certain conditions. And based on the appropriateness and the limitation of the criminal law protection for credit, it’s necessary to figure out the scope and the way of the protection, so that we can delimit the crime circle reasonably and obtain the accurate qualitative of IOU robbery under different circumstances.Other than the introduction and conclusion, the article(about 51000 words) is divided into four parts:The first part: this part sums up the focal point of the controversy over the qualitative of IOU robbery, that whether the credit can be regarded as an object of crime or legal interest of robbery, which means credit can be protected by the criminal law as a type of property or not.The second part: Firstly this part discusses the theory of possession system in the criminal law, and the trend of credit turning into property right, the pledge of obligation, quasi-possession of credit in civil law, and then through compare the similarities and differences between the possession system in criminal law and civil law, finally concluded that the credit by name with ostensible titles can become the object of possession in criminal law theory and the object of quasi-possession in civil law theory, so that it can be the object of robbery.The third part: this part put forward the appropriateness and limitations that the criminal law’s protection for credit should have, and then discuss the issue of how does the criminal law protect the credit. Combined with the system of possession in criminal law and the theory of creditors’ right in civil law, finally defined the scope and the way of protection that criminal law for credit.The fourth part: this part firstly distinguished different situations of IOU robbery, then analyzed the main kinds of IOU robbery in different cases and educed the qualitative of the IOU robbery.