On The Qualification Of Possessing The Property Of Other People By Utilizing The State Public Power

In recent years,with the continuous development of society,the means of crime also show a variety of ways.Some actors use the court's executive power to possess the property of others.However,according to the existing law,the use of state public power to defraud others' property Whether the act constitutes a crime of fraud,the ownership of bank deposits and the standards for the determination of fraud have caused controversy.The cases discussed in this article have the following three points of dispute:(1)Whether the perpetrator acts as fraud or civil fraud;(2)who owns the money deposited into the bank account;and(3)what standards should be adopted for the accomplice of fraud.In addition to the preface of this article a total of four parts.The first part introduces the basic situation of Wang Moumou case.Through the introduction of the case,it points out the controversy of the court,the procuratorate and the perpetrator on the case,and summarizes the focus of this case according to different opinions:(1)Whether the behavior of the perpetrator is fraudulent(2)the ownership of the bank account's possession;and(3)the question of what standards should be adopted for the accomplishment of fraud.The second part of the case around the specific issues related to legal analysis.First of all,through the comparison of the nature of civil law and criminal law,the constitutional elements of civil fraud and fraud,the subjective and objective differences between fraud and civil fraud,and the differences between civil fraud and fraud,Second,according to the case about the ownership of bank deposits involved in the crime of fraud,through the relationship between the possession of criminal law and the possession of criminal law in the civil law,the structure of the criminal law and the recognition of the possession of bank deposits Finally determine the ownership of the possession;Finally,on the determination of the standard of fraudulent conviction,through the analysis of the standards of the five defrauded offenses,it further states that the accusation standard that the uncontrollable accusation should be takenas the crime of fraud should be further explained.At the same time,The impact of fraud,come to the conclusion of the case.The third part is the analysis and conclusion of the case,using the analytical theory of the second part combined with the analysis of the case of this article,the case has drawn its own treatment advice.That is to say,the actor Wang's behavior constitutes fraud rather than civil fraud.The bank's deposit still belongs to the victim Sun's possession.At the same time,the out-of-control theory is used as the criterion for defrauding crimes.The behavior of the actor is the crime of fraud.The fourth part is the research enlightenment of this case.The difference between civil fraud and fraud crime should be compared from the concept and purpose of the two aspects.