Analysis On Some Difficulties For New Types Of Theft

With the continuous development of society, the continuous improvement of people’s living standards, the theft is showing diversified forms in the realistic society. The theft that defined in the criminal law cannot cope with the continuously arising new problems of theft. For this, "Criminal Law Amendment(eight)" modified the constitutive factors of the theft. Based on the two types of behavior mode, “Theft of public or private property with large amount” and "Repetitious theft”, the “Burglary”, “Theft with lethal weapon” and “Steal” were separately convicted. To make the study convenient, the four kinds of theft that " Repetitious theft”, “Burglary”, “Theft with lethal weapon” and “Steal” will be defined as the new type of theft in this paper. In order to accurately apply the law, the “Interpretation of the Supreme People’s court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate on some issues of applicable law in criminal cases of theft”, which released on March 8th, 2013, made corresponding provisions for the difficult, complicated and controversial issues for the above-mentioned four kinds of new adding theft. However, solving a problem may also bring new problems. In the judicial practice, this does not form a unified standard.This paper is divided into three sections. The first section is an overview of the new type of theft, and the main content is the analysis on the background and process of the crime, as well as the dispute of the new type of crime in the judicial determination. The second section is the focus of this paper. It analyzes the fuzzy point which is difficult to be identified and existed in the juridical practice for the four behavior types of the new type of theft. It mainly includes: "Multiple theft" in the "many" in every objective and subjective determination of an act should follow consistent principles, and each time the theft did not constitute a separate offense, it can contain administrative punishment and attempted theft behavior, but the other three new theft to exist side by side, not compatible with each other; "second theft" amount builds up a large amount of behavior, can be convicted. For "burglary" in the understanding of "family" of the current "household" should consider the features and functionality; after a burglary illegal purposes without limiting the "home" before or legal way to enter the others "indoor" or body "outdoor" is not recognized as "burglary", but "indoor" no case should be identified as "burglary." "Carry weapon theft" in the "carry" of that requires that the perpetrator must have a subjective "carry" of subjective bad faith, and do not need to inform the victim; for "weapon" finds its role should be considered in specific cases and to victims the degree of harm. "Pickpocket" in the "carry belongings" finds can not be too broad, the eyes can and can not always identified as "portable"; "pick-pocketing" in the "public place" can not limit a certain number of people, "vehicle" should be under operation state defunct can not be called "vehicle"; "pickpocketing" all the sin in harsh and substandard legislative purpose of criminal law.The third section is the definition for the standard of accomplishment and un-accomplishment in the provision of the four kinds of theft, and to provide a reference for the judicial practice.