论扒窃型盗窃的认定.pdfVIP

Abstract Abstract PRCCriminal Law Amendment Act (8) brings pickpocketing into the punishment scopeof the criminal law as a special theft crime. It also stipulates that peoplewill be convicted once they carry out pickpocketing, regardless of the amountof money, which raises much controversy in the field of law about the conceptof pickpocketing and the understanding of related articles in thecriminal law. In March 2013,theSupreme Peoples Court andthe Supereme Peoples Procuratorate issued the JudicialInterpretation and Law-applicationforTheftCases, detailedly explaining the behaviours of pickpocketing in the criminallaw. It defines that pickpocketing refers to the act of secretly stealingothers’carry-on belongings in public or on public transport. Since pickpocketingwas criminalized, the judicial authoritiesat all levelshas made great effort to fight theft crimes andprotect people’s personal and propertysafety, which has largely controledthesocialharmfulness of pickpocketing. However,withthe deepening of the judicatorypractice, there arise thedoubt andcontroversy about the confirmation of a crime, such as how todefine “carry-on”. Pickpocketingis more harmful than the traditionaltheft in two ways.For one thing, the act of pickpocketing is more likely to hurt the victims. Foranother, it will result in social panic which in turn will cause more socialdanger. According to thelegal provisions about theft inoverseascountries and districts, it isidentified as anaggregated punishment plot to steal carry-onpossessions from others in public orin public transportationvehicles. And this just shows that it is universallyacknowledged that pickpocketing does greater harm than the traditional theft.Fromthe point of criminal law sociology, the proviso rules, elements for crimeamount and explanationtheory, pickpocketing should beanalysedina morecomprehensive m