Reconstruction Of The Legal System Of Lost Property Recovery

Lost items are high-probability events in daily life,so how to recover lost items is a problem that people often have to face.Although China's traditional moral concepts such as "return money found","no one pockets anything found on the road"have a far-reaching influence on us,the probability of returning lost property in China in recent years is much lower than that in Taiwan,Japan,Germany and other countries.Contrary to traditional values,there are many incidents at this stage,such as refusing to return the lost property and demanding high remuneration from the owner.From the perspective of the right of the person who picked up the lost property,our country does not grant the lost property picker the right to claim remuneration,which leads to whether to return the lost property depends entirely on the moral character of the picker,and the law should be practicable,and its requirement for human nature should not be too strict.From the perspective of the obligation of the lost property collector,Articles 109,110 and 111 of the Property Law of our country stipulate the obligation of the owner of the lost property,but they do not further stipulate the ways of relief for the owner of the lost property and the punishment measures for the person who finds the lost property and refuses to return it.It is not effective to help the owner retrieve the lost property only by regulating the obligation of the person who picks up the lost property.At the present stage,there are three problems in China's legislative system on the occupation of lost property.First of all,the development of our current society has changed from an acquaintance society to a stranger society,it's far from enough to rely on the traditional moral concept of","return money found" to restrict the lost property picker;Secondly,under the current system of lost property in our country,China lacks the active involvement of administrative power and ignores the transitional role of administrative power between civil rights and judicial power.Although the owner of the lost property can appeal to the court through a civil lawsuit to the court to request a court ruling,the judicial cost is relatively high and the execution efficiency is low.Thirdly,because it is difficult for the owner of the lost property to know the personal information of the person who found it,the right holder has encountered many practical obstacles in the process of defending his rights.Based on the analysis of the above problems,this paper proposes specific suggestions for improvement from three aspects.Firstly,the establishment of the system of reward claim and the system for the owner to obtain the ownership of the lost property can better motivate the lost property picker to return the lost property to its owner.Secondly,in response to the refusal of the lost property to return such behaviors that are not so harmful to the society,it can be included in the scope of administrative management,administrative organs may intervene in general administration first,and then impose administrative penalties if the lost property is not returned after being notified by the administrative organs.Thirdly,because it is difficult to determine the infringer in most cases of embezzlementthere should be exceptions in the criminal law on the litigation mode of the crime of embezzlement.