On The Criminal Regulation Of The Theft Of Use

The theft of use is a kind of behavior often encountered in daily life and production, the theft of use and theft have many similarities, the two biggest difference is that the person have on long-term or permanent illegal possession’s good intentions, but only has a temporary or short-term deliberately of use property in the theft of use. The object of the theft of use can be movable property, real estate, also can be network resources, and the behaviors are various. There are many different opinions on how to deal with the theft of use in the judicial practice, someone believe that the behavior is theft because of illegal possession of property, someone don’t think the behavior has the purpose of illegal possession, so the theft of use can only be innocent according to the principle of conviction, and there are other views that the theft of use just us illegal possession of other’s house constitute the crime of fraud, crime of illegal invasion of residential, and so on other charges.This text is divided into three parts, from the theoretical disputes and judicial application of the theft of use, to search the best way to solve the related disputes,The first part is bringing up problem according to the case. The first section will introduce the two stolen rental controversial housing cases which in recent years and disputes dealing with similar cases. The second section will focus on introducing the basic situation of this behavior. Introducing the content of the theft of use and summary the basic features of the behavior, compare the theft of use and other acts, and introduce the topic of this paper.The second part will analyze the problem of the theft of use. The biggest controversy on the theft of use is whether it can be theft. The main reason of the dispute is because of the different opinion of the purpose of illegal possession of the theft, mainly includes two aspects: the status of purpose of illegal possession of in the theft and the connotation of the purpose of illegal possession. In the theft, there are two views, which are necessary and unnecessary, on the status of purpose of illegal possession, the connotation of the purpose of illegal possession also has different views: right-holder exclusion theory, punishment theory and compromise theory, etc. It should be affirmed that the purpose of illegal use is the necessary component of theft, and its connotation should be a long-term or permanent exclusion of the right of possession and use of property. The theft of use does not has the purpose of illegal possession of property subjectively, in the object and objective aspects,,it also has its own internal structure, which is quite different from ordinary theft, so its not in accordance with the theft. There are also relevant provisions on the theft of use in China’s legal system, which is embodied in the judicial interpretation of the theft on stealing motor vehicles. This judicial interpretation of the problem is quite limited, itself has some fuzzy zone, it keeps evasive attitude to other theft of use, so it does not have value of universally applied. On the premise of that legal rules are not explicit, how to deal with the theft of use has been a difficulty in the judicial practice. Abide by the principle of conviction, it can only according to be innocent, but a lot of behaviors have no less social harmfulness compared with theft and other crimes, so the criminal law should not stand idly by.The third part will seek solutions to solve the problems of the theft of use. The first section will introduce and analyze the two ways to solve this problem, explaining and regulating the behavior alone. Facts and practice have proved the explanation can’t completely solve the problem, only creating alone regulation for the theft of use is good, and the legislations of western countries in this aspect can be reference for our country. The second section will put forward legislative suggestions. Considering comprehensive the criminal law system and the social harmfulness of the theft of use, setting "the theft of use" after the theft is more appropriate. This part will conduct a preliminary design for the counts and legal punishment of the crime.The fourth part will analyze the theft of use in the judicial practice. This part mainly includes the patterns of the crime and quantity of the crime, and compares the theft of use with other similar crime, just as theft and embezzlement crime. In order to create operating standards in the judicial practice more clearly. The ultimate purpose of this text is to make the theft of use with great harm can be regulated by the criminal law without controversy.