"The facts of this case have been investigated, the court investigation has been completed, and the court arguments are now begining. Court debates revolve around disputed facts that have not been certified by the court and how the law should be applied based on the facts.

The prosecutor will speak first. The presiding judge looked up at the prosecutor.

"Presiding Judge and Judge: We believe that in this case, the defendant Sha Congcong's act of secretly stealing a huge amount of the victim's property has constituted the crime of theft. The specific reasons are as follows:

1. The location of the theft in this case was in the chain hotel room rented by the victim, and no matter where the victim put his watch, it should be considered that the victim still has actual possession of the watch.

2. The defendant admitted that she took the victim's watch because the victim acted rudely during the X transaction, and the purpose of taking the watch was to vent her anger, which shows that the defendant had the intention of illegal possession.

3. The defendant took the watch away when the victim went to the bathroom, which was secretly stolen.

To sum up, the defendant in this case, Sha Congcong, subjectively had the purpose of illegally taking possession of other people's items with a huge amount of money, and carried out the act of secretly stealing, which meets the constitutive elements of the crime of theft.

Since the watch brand stolen by the defendant was Blancpain, valued at 124,000 yuan, and the amount of theft was huge, we recommend that the court sentence the defendant to eight years' imprisonment. The inspector spoke.

Fang Yi glanced at the prosecutor opposite, and said in his heart: This guy can, he must have done a lot of homework in court.

……

"The defendant's defender gives his defense opinion." The presiding judge said.

"Presiding Judge and Judge: The defender has no objection to the charges charged by the prosecutor, but the defender believes that the defendant Sha Congcong has a major misunderstanding of the value of the stolen watch, and the defendant should not be punished according to the actual value of the watch, and should be exempted from punishment. Here's why:

1. The defendant had a material misunderstanding of the value of the watch.

First, the victim casually placed a watch of such a huge value on the table, together with a cigarette and a lighter, so that the sand Cong Cong had a false impression that the value of the watch was average.

Second, after the defendant Sha Congcong was brought into the case, during previous interrogations, he was never able to accurately state the specific characteristics of the watch, such as the brand and model, and always believed that the watch was only worth about 1,000 yuan. This shows that they really don't know anything about a watch and don't care about its actual value.

Thirdly, after the defendant Sha Congcong took the watch home, he did not immediately flee or dispose of the watch, but only put it in an unlocked drawer, which shows that the defendant did not have a clear understanding of the actual value of the watch. If the defendant had known the actual value of the watch, it would not have been possible not to store it properly.

Fourth, in the process of calling the defendant to inquire about the watch, the victim never said the actual value of the watch, only saying that the watch was 'of great significance to him', and said that the watch was not worth much, and that he was willing to give 1,000 yuan as a reward to get the watch back.

The above circumstances deepened the defendant's misunderstanding of the actual value of the stolen watch.

To sum up, we believe that although the defendant's act of taking away another person's watch subjectively had the purpose of illegally taking possession of another person's property, the defendant did not realize the actual value of the watch at that time.

In other words, the defendant subjectively only had the intention of illegally taking possession of another person's 'relatively large' property, but did not have the intention of illegally taking possession of 'huge' property.

In this case, the defendant Sha Congcong had a serious misunderstanding of the value of the watch, and the amount he knew was far lower than the actual amount, and he should not be held liable for the crime for the amount of property that he could not know.

2. The defendant may be exempted from criminal punishment.

According to article 37 of the Criminal Law, criminal punishment may be waived if the circumstances of the crime are minor and no criminal punishment is required.

In view of the fact that the defendant Sha Congcong had a major misunderstanding of the value of the stolen watch, and that the stolen watch had been recovered and returned to the victim, his conduct was a minor crime. The defense counsel recommended that the defendant be exempted from criminal punishment. Complete. Fang Yi finished reading the defense opinions that had just been revised.

"The prosecutor may respond to the defender's arguments." The presiding judge said.

"In response to the defender's defense, we make the following observations:

Otherwise, the defendant in the case may claim to have a material misunderstanding of the value of the stolen watch, so as to evade or escape its legal responsibility.

Therefore, we believe that the defendant's confession and the circumstances at the scene at the time of the crime alone cannot conclude that the defendant had a misunderstanding of the value of the stolen watch. Conviction and sentencing should be based on the actual value of the watch. Complete. The inspector responded.

"The defender may respond to the prosecutor's opinion." The presiding judge looked at Fang Yi.

"Based on the prosecutor's defense and response, the defense counsel issued the following defense opinions:

The defender believes that to determine whether the defendant has a major misunderstanding of the value of the stolen watch, it should be comprehensively analyzed from the personal circumstances of the perpetrator and his performance before and after the act.

The defendant in this case, Sha Congcong, was born in a natural village below the local county, and his family conditions were not good, so he had never seen such an expensive watch, and he neither knew nor heard of such a precious watch.

Sha Congcong is only in his twenties, he has only been in the city from the countryside for more than three years, he has never come into contact with a person with such an expensive watch before, the place where the crime occurred is not a high-end hotel, but an ordinary chain hotel, and whether it is the place where the crime occurred or near his place of residence, the best watches sold in the best shopping malls are only a few thousand yuan.

Therefore, judging from the background of Sha Congcong in this case, his age, occupation, knowledge, experience and other conditions, it is impossible for him to have a clear or general understanding of the actual value of the stolen watch. Complete. Fang Yi responded.

……

In Sha Congcong's case, after the collegial panel deliberated, the presiding judge pronounced the verdict in court.

The court held that the defendant Sha Congcong secretly stole a relatively large amount of property from others, and his conduct constituted the crime of theft. The prosecution's charge that the defendant was guilty of theft should be upheld.

On the one hand, it is enough for the victim to give the defendant a false understanding of the value of a watch because he has a minimum understanding of the value of the watch. On the other hand, it may also cause a defendant who sells Y for a living to develop greed for small profits.

After being detained, and before learning the actual value of the watch he had stolen, the defendant had always mistakenly believed that what he had stolen was just an ordinary watch worth nearly 1,000 yuan.

Judging from the defendant's background, age, occupation, knowledge, experience, etc., the defendant mistook the value of the stolen watch as real and credible, and it was not deliberately circumvented by the defendant.

Today's fourth update, please support book friends! Ask for a monthly pass and a recommended ticket!

(End of chapter)