The Value Of Peace Steal Theory

The crime of theft and the crime of forcible seizure are two common property crimes in judicial practice.Different from most countries in the world that do not independently stipulate the crime of forcible seizure,China stipulates it as a type of crime separately,and the act of snatching must be identified as the crime of forcible seizure,rather than as the crime of larceny or robbery.Therefore,it is particularly important to clarify the boundary between the crime of theft and the crime of forcible seizure not only in the theory of criminal law but also judicial practice.For a long time,the Secret Steal theory of China’s criminal law takes "secret" and "public" as the standard to distinguish the crime of theft from the crime of forcible seizure,and it is used to judge in judicial practice frequently.Even so,with the diversification and complexity of the development of practical cases in recent years,the theoretical viewpoint of secret steal theory has appeared in the process of guiding the practice,which is difficult to cover the judicial gap and some controversial issues,and thus triggered some scholars’ new discussion on the boundary between the two crimes.Based on this,Professor Zhang Mingkai drew lessons from the laws and regulations of foreign countries and Taiwan,and combined with the China’s current judicial status,puting forward a new theory,namely the theory of Peace Steal.The peace steal theory no longer regards secrecy as the main factor of larceny,and believes that theft is not only limited to secret steal,but also can be established by the act of taking money openly without secrecy in some circumstances.The distinction between the crime of theft and forcible seizure should start from the execution behavior.Using non-peaceful means with the possibility of personal injury establish the crime of forcible seizure,while peaceful means which can not be evaluated for the crime of forcible seizure establish the crime of theft.Once the theory of peace steal was put forward,it aroused extensive discussion in the field of criminal law.Although some scholars support this point of view,believing that this point of view breaks secrecy in the traditional secret steal theory,builds an objective evaluation standard,and effectively fills the penalty gap caused by the secret steal theory,most scholars still hold a critical attitude towards it.Adhere to the secret theft theory of scholars believe that peace steal theory’s criticism of the secret steal theory is based on the one-sided understanding of secret steal theory,and its foundation and methodology are also have some unreasonable details.It may even subvert the basic cognition of the public to the crime of theft.So should not replace traditional secret steal theory by peace steal theory.The two theories have rationality and limitation respectively,and the most intuitive way to test the rationality of the theory should be to consider the results of its application in judicial practice.In recent years,there has been a practice of referencing the theory of peace steal,and the act of taking money openly by peaceful means was identified as the crime of theft.Moreover,the newly issued judicial interpretation in recent years has deleted the expression about the secrecy of theft,which further provides a legislative platform for the development of the peace steal theory.The value of peace steal theory has shown.Still,there are some limitations to the peace steal theory.From the perspective of basic ideas,the theory of peace steal does not completely accord with the basic principles of criminal jurisprudence.From the point of view of evaluation standard,the theory of peace steal also has a fuzzy zone that cannot be clearly judged.Secret steal theory can be used for reference to some criticisms of the theory of peace steal.Therefore,on the basis of the original theory of peace steal,attempting to further revise and improving it can make up for its defects and loopholes,so that it can provide a new direction of research for the distinction between the crime of theft and the crime of forcible seizure,and become a theory with more universal guiding significance and practical operability.