A Case Study Of Zhao Xin’s Theft

Since the reform and opening up, China’s economic rapid development, the private property of citizens is increasing. At the same time, the property class crime rising post embezzlement, theft, of Embezzlement is one of the most common crimes. The three crime belong to the same crimes against property ownership, but each with different constituent elements, in theory, it is not difficult to distinguish. However, with the increasingly complex and diverse economic development and social life, economic exchanges between the people in the form and manner become complex, combined with our imperfect legislation, making qualitative produce for many cases of property damage in the judicial practice differences. If you can not correct understanding of these differences, not only is not conducive to China’s criminal law for the protection of public and private property, but also may cause greater social harm of crime are not due punishment. Therefore, the boundaries of the underlying criminal conduct in-depth research, in order to make the correct judicial practice case qualitative, it is particularly important.This article is a typical case of property damage cases-Zhao Xin theft case analysis. The present case, the defense lawyer Zhao Xin’s behavior is exactly the set of related crimes of theft or embezzlement, the Public Prosecution Service, the courts and the suspects Zhao Xin uncompromising. Through the use of a comparative study, a comparative analysis of these three constituent elements of the crime, trying to figure out the distinction between the boundaries of the three crimes. Combined with the focus of controversy in this case and the applicable legal issues related crimes, theft and Embezzlement case analysis, so as to achieve the purpose of correctly distinguish between the three crimes. The case belong to the common cases of property damage class cases, the focus of controversy is where such cases usually the focus of controversy. The author hopes that by this study, is conducive to better distinguish between the boundaries of the duties of Embezzlement, Theft and Embezzlement, thus helpful to the judicial practice in such cases convicted and punished.