Qualitative Analysis On Recipients' Occupation Of Error Remittance

With regard to the qualitative issue on recipients' occupation of error remittance,some academic scholars have made special studies on it or mentioned in the discussion such as possession of deposits.But even so,there are still many debates in current research since the study on this issue inevitably involves the nature of deposit,the possession and ownership of error remittance,etc.Therefore,there is a great disagreement among the seizure crime doctrine,embezzlement crime doctrine and innocence doctrine in respect of the qualitative issue on recipients' occupation of error remittance.Based on this,this paper attempts to reanalyze the controversial focus of this qualitative issue,systematically and comprehensively analyze the involved dispute points,and work out reasonable solutions under the context of current criminal-law in China.The main contents of this paper are as follows:The first part Introduction explains the significance of topic of qualitative analysis on recipients' occupation of error remittance.The research status of this topic in China is combed and summarized.And on this basis,two research emphases are clarified: 1.Solve the issues of possession and ownership of error remittances and the ownership attribution;2.Analyze that the act of occupation of error remittance accords with which property-crime constitution.In the second part,the qualitative arguments of Japanese criminal-law theory on occupation of error remittance are comprehensively investigated based on extraterritorial visual field.And on this basis,it is clear that the disagreement lies in the different understanding of possession and ownership of error remittance.In this regard,a comparative analysis is conducted on merits and demerits of bank possession doctrine,the deposit nominee doctrine,the affirmative doctrine and the disavowal doctrine to seek for something worthy of reference for our country and provide different perspectives for solving error remittance cases in China afterwards.The third part mainly discusses the possession and ownership of error remittances in China.The possession and ownership of deposit cash and deposit claims are demonstrated in detail respectively.And the result explicates that bank has a de-facto possession for deposit cash,and the recipient holds a quasi-possession for the deposit claims.With this regard,the behavior of occupation of error remittance is not in conformity with the seizure crime since the recipient holds a quasi-possession for deposit claims.The ownership attribution of error remittances in China is investigated in the fourth part.The issues of whether the deposit cash and deposit claims have ownership and whom should it belong to are discussed.It is demonstrated that the bank has the ownership of deposit cash;as for deposit claims,there is no ownership.At this point,the act of occupation of error remittance fundamentally does not conform to the behavior constitution---lawful possession turning to unlawful possession,which is required by the embezzlement crime.The fifth part Conclusion makes a comprehensive summary for the viewpoints of paper and re-illustrates that the act of occupation of error remittance shall be disposed of in accordance with innocence.