Research On Judicial Identification Of Special Theft

Prior to the promulgation of the Criminal Law Amendment(8),the original incrimination standards for theft were the larger ones and the multiple intrusions."Criminal Law Amendment(8)" adds three incrimination standards to the crime of theft with homicide,home theft,and pickpocketing.The adjustment completely changed the practice of judicial identification of theft.Subsequently,the Supreme Law issued related judicial interpretations,and the promulgation of related judicial judicial interpretations also had a profound impact on the judicial determination of special theft.This article first explains the background significance of the basic legislation and judicial practice of special theft,and then discusses the issue of judicial recognition of special theft in four parts.The first part mainly studies the common problems of special theft,and studies the special theft from three angles: legal interest violation,identification of nature and completed standards.The second part mainly discusses "theft with a murder weapon".Through typical cases,it reveals the controversial issues in the judicial determination of this type of case,mainly from the perspective of "murder weapon" and "carry with a murder weapon." By comparing and analyzing the different viewpoints existing,what kind of viewpoint is more scientific and what kind of behavior in judicial practice should be regarded as "theft with a murder weapon".The fourth part mainly discusses "poaching".First,through typical cases,it leads to what kind of problems exist in the judicial determination of pickpocketing in practice.Through discussion and analysis of different identification standards and viewpoints of “public places” and “theft objects” in pickpocketing.Find out which viewpoint is the most scientific and reasonable,and what standards should be adopted in judicial practice to identify pickpocketing.The judicial identification of special thefts has very strong practical significance.The determination of recognition standards has important guiding and guiding effects on specific judicial practice.Through the research on the judicial identification of three specific special thefts,the author hopes to find out what are the core issues of the identification of these three special thefts,how to solve these core issues,and what kind of determinations should we take in specific judicial practice? standard.I hope it can help the judicial practice.