The Reconstruction And Application Of Deposit Possession In Criminal Law

Possession is an important concept in property crimes,and clarifying the ownership of deposits is a prerequisite for proper disposal of this type of property crime.However,the He Peng case,the Chou Guobin theft case,Mr.Zhang and Tang credit card fraud cases,etc.have shown that the ownership of deposits has not reached a generally accepted conclusion by the academic community.The discussion of deposit possession needs to address the two aspects of possession and deposit first.An analysis of the nature of possession will reveal that possession in criminal law places more emphasis on fact than in civil law.The concept of normative possession faces challenges such as arbitrary punishment,negation of possession of items lacking proper legal authority,and duality theory and alternative definition of paths cannot properly handle the problems involved in deposit possession,largely because the facts are not clarified Leading power has a central position in the judgment of belonging in criminal law.The concept of de facto possession should continue to be upheld.Possession is a de facto concept.The general concept behind society has a strong factual attribute,which is only to a certain extent corroborating the factual leadership.In the current context of our country,deposits are used in two meanings:deposit claims and deposit cash.Therefore,we should analyze the ownership of deposits in different meanings.The controversial theory of depositor possession,bank possession,and co-ownership in Japanese criminal law scholarship is largely directed at deposit cash.This is because Japan adheres to a strict theory of physicality.However,there are certain differences between China's legis lation and judicature and Japan.In our country,the meaning of property and property is almost the same.Property interests usually belong to the category of property,which provides the possibility of possession of deposit claims.From the standpoint of the concept of factual possession,based on the real ity of our country,the deposit cash should be owned by the bank,and the deposit claims should be owned by the depositor.When dealing with deposit-related cases,it is necessary to clarify the target of the infr inging behavior in the case,and at the same time insist on occupying the core position of fact management leadership in judgment,so that it can properly handle the ownership of deposits in bank card handling,wrong remittance,etc.This article is divided into five parts.In the first part,the article mainly introduces five types of cases such as bank card,erroneous remittance,escrow deposit,bank account,and third-party platform invasion of money,which leads to disputes over deposit ownership in the theoretical and practical ci rcles.,And introduced the existing research results and academic disputes in the theoretical world.In the second part,the article introduces the general possession theory and deposit possession theory in criminal law theory.There is a distinction between the concept of de facto possession and the normative possession in possession theory.There are also depositor possession and bank possession in depos it possession.Confrontation of shared possess ion.In the thi rd part,the article first critiques the previous theory of deposit possession,and at the same time clarifies the basic position that the possession ownership judgment should adhere to,that is,adheres to the core position of factual leadership,and further explains the concept of factual possession.Under the premise of clarifying the duality of the meaning of deposit and the equivalence of the meaning of property and property,the article puts forward the theory of duality deposit ownership.In the fourth part,the article applies this theory to the aforementioned typical types of cases,analyzes the cases,and puts forward their own opinions.Finally,in the concluding part,the article reviews and summarizes the full text.