The Judicial Disposition Determination Of Crime Of Fraud

The crime against property such as theft and fraud cases in judicial practice are common and multiple.In the earlier judicial practice,the criminal means is relatively simple and traditional,offenders often take the fictional facts and conceal the truth,it is not difficult to identify the crime of fraud and easy to distinguish it and other crimes against property.But with the development of economy,the emergence of various new means of fraud often mixed with theft and cheat,such as "dating scam online case" and "using secret remote control device weight cargo tonnage for illegal gain case" and "using the phishing sites to fraud case" and "ticket booking case" and so on,whether these kinds of case should be punished for theft or punished for fraud,this seems to be a problem in the judicial practice.This paper takes of Jiang et al using remote control device to increase the weight of the cargo tonnage for illegal gain case as an example.The full text is divided into four parts,and about20000 words.The first part: the basic information of this case,including cause of action,details of this case,disagreement and focus of dispute.The second part: Jurisprudence analysis of related problems.This part discuss mainly crime of fraud of the subject,act of disposition and consciousness.The most important is the definition of disposition act and disposition of consciousness in distinguish between fraud and related crimes against property category.Academia has ever been controversial on affirmation of disposition act in the crime of fraud,and whether is necessary the consciousness or not.This section mainly summarizes the existing academic views and controversy,and to clarify its position,is that the determination of the crime of fraud should adhere to the need to say the disciplinary action,but it can be interpreted as a mild explanation to the consciousness of punishment.The third part: The analysis and conclusion of the case.This part is mainly based on the above theoretical analysis on issues related and work out the conclusions of the research,the defendant Jiang et al takes means mixed theft and cheat to violate coal industry interest,the person in charge of coal is cheat by Jiang et al ‘s device judging by appearance,and dispose the property,but after careful analysis,we found that the person in charge did not produce the consciousness of inflating weight of coal money.Therefore,Jiang et al constitute the crime of theft.The fourth part: Enlightenment of case.This part is mainly to explore the frequent current new cases of invasion of property,how to determine accurately the behavior mixed with theft and fraud,and how to deal with this kind of crime.