Qualitative Analysis Of "Stealing Rent"

Since the new century,all aspects of our society have made progress,which to a certain extent has enabled the rapid accumulation of social wealth.However,the accumulation of social wealth not only improves people's living standards,but also induces many crimes concerning property.This is a profound proof of an ancient and unchanging law that where there is benefit,there is crime.As we all know,in judicial practice,if an act is on the verge of crime and non-crime,then it will lead to a series of disputes about crime and non-crime,this crime and other crimes.Recently,an act that infringes citizens' property rights acts as a trigger,causing a heated discussion in the academic circles as to whether the act of " stealing rent" constitutes a crime and,if so,what kind of crime should be used to convict and punish it.To this,different people have different opinions and cannot agree.Therefore,in order to conduct a more detailed study on the " rent-stealing" behavior,this paper consists of four parts.The first part starts with the theft case of Yang.First of all,it introduces the " rent-stealing" behavior,that is," rent-stealing" refers to the behavior of using illegal means to enter the house without the consent of the owner.Later,in his own name,he rented the house to others,and then charged the rent of the tenant,and took the rent as his own.Secondly,three different opinions on the handling of Yang's theft case are summarized.The first view is that Yang's behavior does not constitute a crime,but only bears civil liability.The second opinion holds that Yang's act constitutes fraud.The third opinion holds that he is guilty of theft.Finally,the controversial focus of the case is refined: first,the difference between unjust enrichment and property crime;Second,the nature of the mixed behavior of theft and deception;Third,the criminal object of theft and the method of identification.The second part analyzes the legal principle behind the controversial focus of the case.This part is divided into three parts.The first part analyzes the relationship between unjust enrichment and property crime.Through the analysis of the concept and composition of the two,it is concluded that they are a kind of competing relationship,and their differences mainly lie in the social harm degree of the behavior,the responsibility ability of the actor and the subjective mentality.In the second part,this article discusses two issues: first,the difference between the implementation of theft and fraud,thus obtaining the difference between fraud in fraud and fraud in secret theft.The main difference between crime of fraud and theft is whether there is a disposition of property.Second,when the behavior of the actor involves three parties,the difference between the indirect principal offenders of triangle fraud and theft lies in whether the decedent has the awareness of punishment and whether he has the right of punishment.In the third part,this article discusses that the things that the theft crime refers to can include real estate,and also analyzes that the specific crime object should be determined by combining other people or things involved in the crime and other elements in the crime constitution.The third part analyzes the case with the conclusion drawn from the above theoretical analysis.In this part of the article,the author combines the viewpoints obtained in the second part to give a definite answer to whether yang mou's " rent-stealing" behavior constitutes a crime in this case.Then,because its behavior is totally incompatible with the composition of the crime of fraud,it denies that the behavior of actor Yang is the crime of fraud.Then,according to the four elements of the crime,this article analyzes that the actor's behavior completely conforms to the composition of theft in terms of elements,and clearly points out that the crime object of " stealing rent" is the real estate,and at the same time points out that yang's behavior is essentially different from using theft.The fourth part is the research enlightenment to this case.In this paper,through the qualitative research of " rent-stealing" behavior,we found some deficiencies in our existing legislation and practice.First,judicial workers should correctly distinguish and treat civil infringement and property infringement crimes in judicial practice.Second,the current law provides little protection against real estate infringement,so this article suggests that legislation should add an independent crime against real estate crime;Third,theft will be used as a separate criminal punishment.