The Intents of Exclusion and Use in the Property Crimes
CHEN Hong-bing
DOI: https://doi.org/10.16197/j.cnki.lnupse.2013.03.016
2013-01-01
Abstract:The general theories in Germany and Japan believe that the intent of illegal acquisition(i.e.the purpose of illegal possession) includes the intent of exclusion and the intent of use.The function of the former is to distinguish between the theft and the unlawful use as theft,while the latter’s function is to tell the differences between the theft and the crimes of damage.In Germany,the act of unlawful use as theft is considered as no intent of exclusion,so it should not be punished in principle.However,in Japan,they come to the conclusion that such act should be punished.The determination of crime in China should be both qualitative and quantitative,so the intent of exclusion is needed and the act of unlawful use as theft should not be punished.The intent of use has the function of distinction,also it can explain why the statutory sentence of the theft is harder than that of the crimes of damage,so it is reasonable to emphasize the intent of use;Asking for "thankful fees"or extorting money after stealing doesn’t possess the purpose of illegal possession,so it doesn’t form the crime of theft.The criminal offences outside the chapter of crimes of property violation,such as steal,snatch,etc.