【作者】 李锐；

【导师】 马明贤；

【作者基本信息】 兰州大学 ， 刑法学， 2012， 硕士

【摘要】 盗窃罪是最古老的一种犯罪,也是最典型的一种财产性犯罪。从近些年来的司法实践来看,刑事案件中侵犯财产的犯罪所占比例最大,而盗窃罪又是侵占财产的犯罪中最为常见的一种犯罪。其特点表现为“三多”,犯罪案件数量多,重大案件多,重刑案件多,历来是司法各部门打击的重点,因为盗窃手段的多样性和隐蔽性,给社会秩序带来了不稳定的因素,对人们的正常生活也产生了不利影响。本文所选案例是盗窃罪的一个典型案例,本文从谌升炎盗窃罪入手研究了盗窃罪的定罪量刑问题,以及和相关罪名的区别。在该案中,谌升炎在送完头寸箱后发现同事李兴荣将装有10万元现金的白色邮袋遗忘在拉闸门的通道上,谌升炎乘机捡走这装有10万元现金的白色邮袋。该案引发了检法机关的诸多争议。本案所选案例体现了在司法实践中辨别盗窃罪和其它侵犯财产性犯罪的复杂性,本案争议焦点集中在盗窃罪、侵占罪和职务侵占罪。在量刑上也有很大的争议,湖南省安化县法院判决为有期徒刑十年,并处罚金一万元。而湖南省高级人民法院判决为有期徒刑三年,缓刑四年,并处罚金一万,前后相差甚远。笔者希望通过对该案的分析与探索,能够更好的把握司法实践中所遇到的问题。更多还原

【Abstract】 Crime of theft is one of the oldest crime, and it is also one of the most typical crime of property. From the judicial practice in recent years, the proportion of the crime of property violation is the largest in criminal case. At the same time, crime of theft is the most common crime in the crime of property violation. The characteristic embodies three aspects. The number of criminal cases are large, the number of important cases are large and the number of cases of serious sentence are large. They are cracked down by the judicial branch of government. The diversified and invisible methods of theft cause the elements of the unstable social order, and also bring adverse impact on the people’s normal life.The case in the paper is a typical case of crime of theft.The writer in this paper discusses the judgment and sentence discretion of the crime of theft, and the difference between crime of theft with similar crime from Shenshengyan’s theft case. In this case, after Shenshengyan send boxes filled with money, he found his colleague Lixingrong left the white bag filled with a hundred thousand in an access. Shenshengyan picked up the white bag filled with a hundred thousand. This case generates many arguments. The case chose by the present writer reflects that it is very complicated to distinguish the crime of theft from the crime against property. The arguable point in this case are crime of theft, crime of embezzlement and post occupy crime. The measure punishment in this case is also arguable. There is a large disparity between different judgments. Anhua Country court sentenced Shenshengyan to ten years’imprisonment and fined him ten thousand, but the supreme people’court of Hunan Province sentenced him to three years’ imprisonment, four years’probation and fined him ten thousand. The author wants to grasp the problem in judicial practice through analyzing and exploring the case.更多还原