Rational Delineation Of The Crime Circle

It’s of great importance to divide criminal law circle reasonably,especially the property crime in the fifth chapter of the criminal law for its multiple.We can see that our country’s current criminal has already broken the single standard of conviction from the frequency admission into the criminal law of multiple times infringement upon property.When replenish the traditional amount criterion increasing the times,it brings new problems of multiple objective criterion.This essay bases on new amendment of criminal law discussing the object of infringement upon property and legal interest using objective punishment condition generalizing times and amount to study the standard in order to offer advice and suggestions for legislation and justice.This paper can be divided into six parts,as follows:The first part raises questions and draws the outline from the aspect of two function of criminal law and modesty of criminal law discussing the significance of reasonable division of criminal law circle.Then cards the outline of the fifth chapter of criminal law concluding the rule and traits on which bases finding its current problems.The second part discusses the core theme of looking into the legal interest and object of crime.Basing on the discussion of what is the essence of crime,my conclusion is the infringement upon legal interest and property right as well as other property is the value origin point of property crime.For the reason that property right is related to fundamental order,this essay endorses to punish the conduct of ‘Stealing from Thieves’ and at the same time disagrees the statement of ‘illegal occupation is also the legal interest of property crime’.The third part discriminates and determines the object of infringement upon property is property.Firstly analyzes the value of property in the fifth chapter of criminal law and raises the idea that only the property according to the social consensus can be taken into.Secondly broadens the scope of property to including interests of property and discusses the nature of conduct as stealing or destroying the bankbook and IOU.Lastly combines the discussion from preamble and advices that contraband should not be vest in the object of infringement upon property.The fourth part is the key part of this essay arguing the relationship between times and amount of infringement upon property.Firstly analyzes and judges the nature of multipletimes infringement upon property based on the legislation model of determination upon amount and draws the conclusion of consequential offence.Secondly making barrier effect of amount and supplementary function of times prominent.Although adds the new standard of times,the value of damaged or to-be damaged property is still considered by criminal law.Lastly analyzes the relationship between times and amount and draws the conclusion that times doesn’t have the function of determining the quality solely.Logic of crime determination still follows the order as value being considered firstly.Only if the value close to the criterion of crime determination has times the chances to exert its function.The fifth part discusses about what is the one time and how to determinate the accusation.The determination of times can refer to the rule of continuing offence but not to accept overall.We should suspend the theoretical dispute of continuing offence and exclude the hard-todeterminate subjectively ‘generalized guilty intent’.And talking about the combination of times and different ways of infringement upon property should not be enslaved to multipletimes.We should still insist on the original principle of determination.Otherwise,citing multiple-times of property crime forcibly would be lost in trouble.The sixth part is the last past reflecting whether it’s necessary to broaden criminal law blindly on the base of preamble.Frequent amendment of criminal law may be somewhat impulsive and cause trouble.Lawmaker should also pay attention to quality of legislation to maintain the systematic of criminal and never lose the culture as a lawmaker just to respond to social demand.