Research On The Identification Of The Property Interests In Larceny

Larceny has a long history, and it is constantly changing with the developmentof human society. There is a lot of controversy in judicial practice of larceny, such ashow to identify the issue of stealing property interests. With the development ofsociety, the scope of property of criminal law gradually expanded. Many new typesof property continue to emerge, thus the concept of property interests is graduallyborn in such a tendency. The issues of the connotation and classification of propertyinterests hasn’t specific provisions in the existing criminal law. What is theconnection between the property interests and property in criminal law? Whetherproperty interests could become the object of larceny through explanation? How tocorrectly identify the behavior of stealing property interests? Through analysis Ithink there is a certain link between property interests and property, and part of theproperty interests can be interpreted into the scope of the property. I also classifiedand summarized the features of the larceny’s object, and hope to correctly handle theproblems of stealing property interests by comparing and analyzing the things.The thesis starts with several cases, following the issue on the theft of propertyinterests, then defines the connotation and denotation by analyzing the propertyinterests. It also generalizes the characteristics of the property in the criminal law byreferring to the previous academic researches, then compares different types ofproperty interests with the connotation of property respectively, at last, finds thatdocument of title can be defined as property in criminal law. The document of titlehas an objectively economic interest. It conveys property interests, which shares thesame nature with property. Therefore, its interpretation as a property conforms to theinterpretation rules in criminal law and also can be generally accepted. As for humanbehaviors, i.e. the service provided by the person, because it is different fromproperty in essence, the thesis believes that it can not be interpreted as a property inthe criminal law. The object of larceny is property. So anything that couldn’t beinterpreted as property can not be the object of larceny. However, even if it can beinterpreted as the property, it still needs to compare with the other characteristics of the object of larceny. If the behavior of stealing property interests fully complieswith the features, then it can be identified as larceny. Otherwise it can’t. Finally, thethesis extends to the issue of virtual property, discusses the difference betweenvirtual property and property interests from the view of connotation, and thendistinguishes the behavior of stealing property interests from virtual property.The research on the issue of stealing property interests, not only provides aclearer idea in the judgment of property interests, but also makes a reference for theidentification of property interests. It can provide a strong support for the China’sjudicial practice in the future.