Song Hongmei And Other Four People To Steal Property Case Analysis

Theft and fraud are two ordinary encroachment upon property crimes in criminal cases, whose incidence rate is very high, two kinds of crime in the crime constitutions, into the amount of crime, penalties and other aspects have different, when the crime means is single, we can generally be good screening, but when the actor’s behavior interweaves the two means of theft and fraud, it is difficult to define. The case in this paper is a typical representative. Song Hongmei et al mutual invitations by posing the role of a doctor, ask passers-by, guide,the message to acquire the trust of victims Zheng, said as long as Zheng took out the money in the home and let the chemical operating can ward off evil, Zheng then prepared 160000 yuan to the Song Hongmei et al. Song Hongmei et al used the preparing soap replacing the 160000 yuan, then fled. Yuanling County People’s Court of first instance to the crime of theft of four judgments, Huaihua City Intermediate People’s Court of second instance to the crime of fraud of four judgments.Three focus of controversy generated in the process of the case, one case is the sentencing of a crime or simply a crime; the second is the key to the case is the conviction of the perpetrator of the main actors or victims whether disposition; third case is scheduled theft or fraud conviction. Through analysis of the case that: First, as the case in Song Hongmei et al only implemented a behavior, and this behavior only violated a legal interest, so only committing a crime, does not belong imaginative joiner of offense or implicated offenses, so the case is simple a crime; secondly, although the main perpetrator of acts of a certain reference role in the qualitative case, but due to the current definition of the main actors is no uniform standard, we can not determine which behavior is the main act in order,to avoid the emergence of different treatments for the same conduct, therefore the main key can not to be the behavior of a conviction. The basic framework of theft and fraud in criminal cases by using hybrid means, the only difference between the two cases is no act of disposition for the theft of the victims, and the act of disposition is the only element to distinguish between acts which is based on the violation of the victim or o acquiring victim’s own accord, so the key to the conviction in this case should be whether the disposition victim, if the victim has to dispose of property based on misconceptions disposition, it should be characterized as a fraud, if the victim is not based on misconceptions punishment does not have the disposition of property, it should be classified as theft. Thirdly behavior includes four disposal again connotation that is necessity to dispose of consciousness, discipline must have permission to dispose of property and status, and disposition is the direct cause of property damage, disposition people have let the other party holds property alone mean, the direct cause of behavior is not the case in the victim’s loss of property and did not let the Song Hongmei et al alone the meaning of possession of the property, and therefore Zheng did not have the disposition, so Song Hongmei et al’s behavior was not fraud, whereas Song Hongmei et al’s behavior is the subjective purpose of illegal possession, objectively theft of other people’s money to implement Zheng dominance of property and the establishment of new domination relations, therefore Song Hongmei et al act on suspicion of theft.