Nature Determination Of The Behavior Of Setting False Parking Lots To Possess Vehicles Of Others Illegally

The “behavior of setting false parking lots to possess vehicles of others illegally”refers to that the perpetrator sets false parking lots for the purpose of illegalpossession of others’ vehicles to exclude others’ possession and achieve their owndomination over the vehicles. In practice, there are two main types: open possessionand secret possession of setting false parking lots to possess others’ vehicles illegally.The former refers to that the perpetrator transfers the vehicles to other places in thepresence of the owners with various reasons or excuses when the owners fall prey tostoring their vehicles after the false parking lots are set, and thus possesses illegallywithout caring the number. The latter refers to that the perpetrator illegally possessesthe vehicles that the victims store in the false parking lots with the methods of “firstcontrolling, and then possessing”.There are many disputes in determining the behavior of setting false parking lotsto possess vehicles of others illegally in the criminal theory and judicial practice, ingeneral, mainly including the views of fraud crime, contract fraud crime,embezzlement crime and theft crime, in which the view of theft crime is popular. Theview of embezzlement crime regards the perpetrator’s temporary custody of thevehicles as “keeping”, and believes that setting false parking lots to possess vehiclesof others illegally constitutes a crime of embezzlement, but it cannot explain thelegitimacy of the “keeping” and the preexistence of the purpose of illegal possession.Based on the fraud of “false parking lots” and the “delivery” behavior of the ownershanding over vehicles to the perpetrator for custody, the view of fraud crime believesthat setting false parking lots to possess vehicles of others illegally constitutes a crimeof fraud, but there are some significant flaws in explaining the fraud and disposition.The view of contract fraud crime regards the relationship directly related to thevehicle custody between the owners and the perpetrator as the verbal custody contractof the contract fraud crime, but it does not note that the so called “contract” in thebehavior of setting false parking lots to possess vehicles of others illegally does notconform to the “contract” in the contract fraud crime in nature. The view of theftcrime considers that the deceptive behavior of “setting false parking lots” is to createconditions for the secret theft, the essence of setting false parking lots to possessvehicles of others illegally is the behavior that the perpetrator transfers the vehicles and possesses illegally after the temporary control of the vehicles, which makes sense.For the behavior of setting false parking lots to possess vehicles of othersillegally, the intent of illegal possession of the perpetrator goes before the “keeping”,and the so called “keeping” is illegal substantively, so that the behavior does notconstitute a crime of embezzlement.“Setting falsely” in the behavior of setting falseparking lots to possess vehicles of others illegally is not enough to be the deception offraud crime, and the behavior of the owners to deposit vehicles is not a dispositionbehavior, also there is no direct causal relationship between “setting false” parkinglots and losing control over the vehicles, so the behavior does not constitute a crime offraud as well. The behavior of setting false parking lots to possess vehicles of othersillegally constitutes a crime of contract fraud, which, I think, is in question. In thebehavior of setting false parking lots to possess vehicles of others illegally, thebehavior of the owners to deposit vehicles does not form a contract in the contractfraud crime, and “setting false parking lots” is also not among the “other methods” inthe crime of contract fraud, so the behavior does not constitute a crime of contractfraud.“Setting false parking lots” is to create conditions to possess the vehicles ofothers illegally, the essence of which is in secret, therefore, the behavior of settingfalse parking lots to possess vehicles of others illegally constitutes a crime of theft.