Judicial Determination Of Multiple Thefts

Larceny is an ancient and frequent crime.It can be said that larceny should be accompanied by the historical process of human development.Through the development of practice,it has gradually formed a systematic concept and gradually developed and improved.In China,the legislation and judicial interpretation of larceny keep pace with the times,and the debate on the relevant provisions of larceny has been continuing in the academic and judicial practice circles.The latest"criminal law amendment 8" determines the conviction mode of larceny in our country at this stage,that is,multiple theft,armed theft,pickpocketing,burglary,four ways of behavior and the amount requirements are listed as the crime of larceny,which is an important change in the development history of larceny.As one of the counts of crime,the importance of the recognition standard of multiple theft is self-evident.Although the judicial interpretation in 2013 explained the recognition standard of multiple theft,that is,"three times of theft in two years",there are still disputes on the recognition in theory and practice.The changes of time and place elements in the revised multiple thefts substantially reduce the entry threshold,which to some extent makes it a bottomless clause.As long as the requirements of three times of thefts in two years are met,a larceny can be established.This also brings about a new identification problem,how to count it once.There is no further explanation for this in criminal law norms.The blank of legal provisions or judicial interpretation will cause confusion in judicial practice,which may lead to the problem that judges may have too much discretion in the specific application process and make different judgments in the same case.This article will first sort out the legislative change process of multiple thefts,and make a preliminary definition of the meaning of multiple thefts,and then analyze the objective and subjective elements of multiple thefts,as well as the relationship between multiple thefts and several other crimes of larceny,in order to provide some suggestions for the identification of multiple thefts in judicial practice.