Study On Several Problems In Theft And Sale IOU

As a proof of civil debt, IOU are widely used to trade, but not to stipulate the criminallaw bill. In recent years, criminal cases triggered by ious occur frequently, so we must locatethe necessary carding and clear ious in the criminal law. In this paper, through the analysis ofa typical case, the paper focuses will be considered in the judgment of illegality and iouscases, at the same time, the Author analysis the law benefit of property crime law and thejudgment method of social harmfulness, understand justice should be how to grasp onproperty of difficult cases.This paper is divided into five parts:The first part describes the basic situation of the case,the author points out,the scholarson this case caused by,"guilty" and "not guilty" theory of opposing views, then sum up thefocus of controversy of the case.The second part is the evaluation of the criminal law on the behavior of stealing IOU thisindividual behavior. First of all, the author evaluates the nature of property and propertyinterests, and points out that as the object of property crime must have economic value, IOUitself has no value, but its particularity lies in the Wang’s ownership, not all negative ious notproperty crime object. Secondly, according to some scholars put forward distinguish iouspositioning through behavior subject identity, the author puts forward to harm result as thejudgment basis of IOUS in nature, thinking of actor alone no harm result in stealing IOU,innocent conclusion. After the indicated his standpoint, the last part is criticize the guilty onthe views of scholars.The third part discusses on Chen, Li trading IOUs behavior. This part mainly relates totheir views on the proposed: guilty of intentional destruction of property crimes, fraud, theft,blackmail and impose exactions on crime, conceal the proceeds of crime, the proceeds ofcrime and the crime of embezzlement. At the same time, as a result of the case in practicewith embezzlement, the author give more detailed interpretation to the crime ofembezzlement, and finally points out that the above views are not established.The fourth part is the author view of Chen, Li trading IOUs behavior.This part is dividedinto two small parts. The first part is the analysis of property crime law perspective: first, thelaw is the behavior criminal law basis, so long as that the sale of IOUS behavior caused no benefit is damaged, defendants can be identified no guilty. At this point, according to therelated theory, the author demonstrates the range of property crime in our criminal law benefitlaw protection, summarizes criminal law of our country does not fully accept the "legal,economic property", but the illegal interests into the criminal law, based on the factors ofsocial order. Secondly, to reform the existing "ownership" in the scope of the property of thelegal interest of the crime, the illegal possession should be regarded as property crime law.Finally,the author puts forward his opinion: that both Chen’s betrayal, or Lee’s purchasebehavior is not harm result, property crime law is not violated.The fifth part is about the case caused by content. This part is divided into two parts, oneis that expansion of the meaning of ownership to instead ownership of narrow sense of civillaw, in order to include the creditor’s rights and other property. The second is that in thejudicial practice, for the property type crime, judicial personnel should not take the behaviorto identify the social harmfulness, and we should pay more attention to the harm result,leading to harmful result.