The Research Of Behavior Of Dealing With Stolen Things After The Theft

Stealing is always a common multiple crime, its essential characteristics of a conditionalcrime decides the actor may also do further sanctions after the completion of the theft whichis called “behavior of dealing with stolen things after the theft”. Correctly judging thebehavior of dealing with stolen things after the theft directly relates to the actor’s conviction.However, although the case of the behavior in judicial practice are more and more, somebehaviors’ qualitative legislations have been made, the basic theory also has been reached, butthere are still many disputes about some behaviors’ qualitative, even “nobody mentioned”,which lets the judges in some trial case do not know how to do, which is not good to thejudicial referee. Theory is based on practice, so that problems in practice being attention anddeeply researched is not only beneficial to fill the theory blank, but also more advantageous tothe guidance of the judicial practice and realize judicial justice. Therefore, to really solvethese behavior qualitative problems, it is necessary to give the behavior of dealing with stolenthings after the theft specific research and discussion.This paper contains following four parts:The first part, present the drawings of the behavior of dealing with stolen things after thetheft. First of all, using two cases as a representative to carry on the practice drawings,reflecting the judge’s hesitation in our country’s present judicial practice when dealing withthe case of the behavior of dealing with stolen things after the theft, which bringsdisadvantages to the judging efficiency and judicial just; secondly, present the currentlegislation and judicial interpretation, which reflects our current authority regulation not onlyis poor and single, but also are more or less confusing and not easy to understand, which isnot advantageous to guide the judicial trial; finally, present the theory about the behavior ofdealing with stolen things after the theft, list all kinds of views of the scholars about thebehavior of dealing with stolen things after the theft in current criminal law theory, to reflectthe theoretical interpretation is various and lack of the special research.The second part, define the concept of “the behavior of dealing with stolen things afterthe theft” and classify. Fist, put forward the concept of “the behavior of dealing with stolenthings after the theft”, and set about respectively from the understanding of “after the theft”、the “stolen things” and “the behavior of dealing with stolen things” to distinct the behaviorsexpert and denotation, it is defined as: these behaviors that are aimed at possessing illegally, stealing secretly the public or private property, and doing further holding, using, selling,damaging, altering, etc after obtaining the property of the stolen goods; secondly, classify thebehavior of dealing with stolen things after the theft, started with the crime constitution as astandard, divided into the behavior that does not constitute a crime and the behavior that doesconstitute a crime, distinct the sin and the not sin, then according to the behavior ‘s object iscommon item or special item in the behavior that does constitute a crime, dividing thebehavior into behavior whose object is common item and behavior whose object is specialitem, finally, according to the different way of behavior, classify all kinds of different objectbehavior in small particles,The third part, analysis the quality of the behavior of dealing with stolen things after thetheft. Firstly, put forward the judgment standard with the crime constitution as the foundation,combining the theory of law benefit and implicating crime, and put the standard into threestages as the concrete judgment path; secondly, use the standard and judgment path,combining with the present criminal law theory knowledge, to analysis each kind ofbehavior’s quality in detail.The fourth part, put forward the improvement suggestions about the behavior of dealingwith stolen things after the theft. First of all, improve the legislation, the provisions ofparagraph3of the article196of <criminal law> has many shortcomings, produces manydisadvantages that can not overcome, so suggest to transform the legal fiction into provisionof attention, namely:“steal credit cards and use, shall be punished in accordance with theprovisions of the preceding paragraph”; secondly, judicial perfect, suggest that formulatingjudicial interpretation and authoritative typical cases to standardize the behaviors of dealingwith stolen things after the theft which are not formulated temporarily and controversiallargely.